,'.:l-!lr.>-: 



'fM'i' 



\\M0' 



mmm 



'A\Ul)\im*V\nn\\iH}UiU^:i\<:'.' ji '.'^ u^-u <' : *;!.>< "'jj ;;iM ;ni S\:} i Wi iiOnin; !U^i?!!-ii 










% 



"v^ - - V- i<3 ca * \C' ^ 




0< 






^^- V 













.V 



r*'l' 









A^^ 



.^' -J^, 



^^ 



. V . U 



' f< 



%^ 






c^' 









-y 



/" c « ^ ^- . 



x^ ^^. 









'^^c^. ^ 



■ ^ "ijjt. ""^ .jwr- ^ 
- / ,^ i s ^ \ ^ 









i 



.^ ^i- 



" . %; 



■^^ 



>\ 






<: 
B 










7^% 



•"oo^ 









^ V * ^ 









Story of the Nations 

A Series of Historical Studies intended to present in 
graphic narratives the stories of the different 
nations that havr attained prominence in history. 



In the story form the current of each national 
life is distinctly indicated, and its picturesque and 
noteworthy periods and episodes are presented for 
the reader in their philosophical relations to each 
other as well as to universal history. 



12°, Illustrated, cloth, each 
Half Leather, each . 
Nos. 62 and following Nos. 
Each .... 
Half leather, gilt top, each 



. $1.50 

. $1.75 
net $1.35 

(By mail) $1.50 
net $1.60 

(By mail) $1.75 



FOR FULL LIST SEE END OF THIS VOLUME 



PARLIAMENTARY ENGLAND 




RIGHT HON. CHARLES JAMES FOX, M.P. (1749-1806). 

From a hitherto unpublished portrait by Lady Diana Beauclerk, reproduced 
by kind permission of Colonel Lascelles. 



THE STORY OF THE NATIONS 



Parliamentary 
England 

THE EVOLUTION OF THE CABINET 
SYSTEM 



BY 

EDWARD JENKS, M.A. 

1/ 
READER IN ENGLISH LAW IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD 



-, 3 3 , 5 3 3 , J , », 



NEW YORK 

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

LONDON : T. FISHER. UNWIN 

1903 



PREFACE 



A BOOK of this size, which is to deal with a 
century and a half of modern history, can only 
succeed by limiting its treatment to a single side 
of the national life. The author has, accordingly, 
chosen for his subject the evolution of that curious 
form of government which is known as the Cabinet 
System, the appearance and development of which 
synchronise almost exactly with the period under 
consideration. Whatever be the merits and defects 
of that system, and whatever its future fate, it must 
always remain a subject of deep interest to students 
of history, and especially to students of English 
history. For it has had an immense influence on 
the politics of the world ; and it is one of the most 
characteristic products of the English mind. The 
author employs the word " English " advisedly ; for 
it is noteworthy that neither in Scotland nor in 
Ireland, before the Unions, is there any trace of the 
Cabinet System, and, though it has been freely 
adopted by the self-governing colonies, there are 
many who doubt whether it is essentially suited to 



X PREFACE 

the circumstances either of colonial or of imperial 
politics. 

The author, though he cannot pretend to an 
exhaustive knowledge of the vast mass of material 
available for the period, has made use of the 
standard sources, a few of which are, for the benefit 
of students, enumerated in the Appendix. Among 
recently published authorities are especially to be 
noticed Sir William Anson's edition of the Grafton 
Papers, and Mr. Graham Wallas's admirable mono- 
graph on Francis Place, who was the soul of the 
democratic movement of the early nineteenth century. 

The author's thanks are especially due also to Mr. 
C. Grant Robertson, Fellow of All Souls' College, 
Oxford, who has been good enough to read the proof 
sheets, and to Mrs. Norman Moor, for her kindness 
in preparing the Index. 

Oxford, 

J line ^ 1903- 




CONTENTS 



The Politics of the Restoration 



1-30 



Policy of Cromwell — Convention Parliament — Rural Govern- 
ment — Municipal Government — -Methods of Clarendon — 
Crown Revenues — Crown expenditure — The Court party — 
The Privy Council — The Cabal. 



II. 



The Glorious Revolution 



31-58 



Regency scheme — Mary of Orange — Assembly of peers — 
Second Convention Parliament — The two resolutions — The 
Free Conference— Regency scheme fails — Constitutional 
reforms — Revolution policy — A limited monarchy. 



III. 



The Last of the Old Order 



59-91 



France and Ireland — Choice of ministers — Leniency of 
William — Turbulence of officials— Power of the Commons — 
The resort to corruption — Campaign in Ireland— Govern- 
ment expenditure — Criminal prosecutions — Parties in Council 
— Return of Sunderland — Attitude of William. 



Xll CONTENTS 

IV. 

PAGE 

Signs of Change ...... 92-119 

Essentials of the Cabinet System — The King's supremacy — 
Government of Anne — France and Scotland — The Scottish 
Parliament— Occasional Conformity Bill — Disputed elections 
— The Aylesbury case — Divisions in the Ministry — Hano- 
verian succession — Basis of the Cabinet System — An un- 
conscious development. 



The System of Walpole .... 120-153 

Character of Walpole — Union with Scotland — Terms of the 
Union — Victories of Marlborough — Trial of Sacheverel — 
Industry and commerce — The Septennial Act — Convocation 
suspended — National Debt — South Sea Bubble — Walpole's 
ascendency at Court — His financial measures — His ascen- 
dency in Parliament — A disciplinarian — Importance of the 
House of Commons. 



VI. 

The System on its Trial .... 154-177 

Colonial enterprise — Incipient reform — Commons and Cabinet 
— Admission of Pitt to office — Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle — 
The need of reform — Rise of the British Empire — The new 
factor in politics. 



VII. 

A Patriot King 178-210 

Education of the King — Blackstone's Conimentaries — Weak- 
ness of the Cabinet System— The Bute Ministry — Perse- 
cution of Whigs — Prosecution of Wilkes — The Grenville 
Ministry — Colonial trade — British commercial jealousy — 
Grenville's Acts — Fall of Grenville. 



CONTENTS Xlll 

VIII. 



PAGE 



The King's Friends 211-243 

Repeal of the Stamp Act — Pitt in ofifice — His retirement — 
The Wilkes libels — Triumph of Wilkes — Policy of North — 
America and the tea duty — American independence — Per- 
sonal government — Publicity of debates — English Law in 
Canada — ^Justice in England. 



IX. 
Revival of the Cabinet System . . . 244-282 

Attitude of Rockingham — Repression in Ireland — Loyalty of 
Irish Catholics — Catholic relief — Measures of reform — Peace 
negotiations — Coalition of Fox and North — A weak Cabinet 
—Indian legislation — East Indian Company remodelled — 
Warren Hastings — Fox's India Bill — Intervention of the 
King — Pitt's administration — Defeat of the Opposition — 
Triumph of Pitt — Influence of popular approval. 



X. 

Pitt 283-323 

Pitt's India Act — Impeachment of Hastings — Financial re- 
form — The " Sinking Fund" — Hostile tariffs — The Regency 
question — Ireland and the French Revolution — Irish Catho- 
lics enfranchised — War with France — The Emancipation 
Bill — Irish disaffection — Rebellion in Ireland — Union with 
Ireland — The Peace of Amiens — Government of Canada — 
Conservatism of Pitt. 

XL 

Reaction and Reform 324-378 

Foreign and domestic affairs — The industrial world — Popular 
discontent — Death of George HI.— The working-class move- 
ment — Condition of Ireland — O'Connell's campaign — Re- 



XIV CONTENTS 

PAGE 

ligious toleration — Parliamentary reform — The borough 
system — Anomalies of the Franchise — The Reform Bill — 
Bill rejected by the Lords — Reformers at work — Passing of 
the Bill. 

XII. 

History and Criticism 379-426 

Distrust of absolute monarchy — Official responsibility — The 
new tendency — Whig organisation — The Great Whig Party — 
The power of the House of Commons — The policy of bribery 
— The Tory Party — Evolution of the Cabinet System — 
Politics in solution — The English attitude in politics — The 
Royal Prerogative — Popularity of the Crown — Virtue of the 
Cabinet System — Power of the Cabinet — -The House of 
Lords— The spirit of leniency — Men and measures— Minis- 
terial types — Flexibility of the System — Political organi- 
sations — Government by persuasion — The Cabinet and the 
country. 

Leading Dates in the History of the Cabinet 

System . . . . . . . .427 

List of Selected Authorities for the Period . 430 

Index ......... 433 




LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



RIGHT HON. CHARLES JAMES FOX, M.P. (1749- 

1806) ..... F?-ontispiece 

From a hithciio unfiiblislicd Poitrait by Lady Diana Bcaiiclerk. 
Reproduced by kind pciniission 0/ Colonel Lascclles. ' 

PAGE 

EDWARD HYDE, EARL OF CLARENDON (1608-1674) . 7 

From an engraving after Sir Peter Leiy (Lodges Portraits, Harding 
and Lefpard, 1835.) 

ANTHONY ASHLEY COOPER, FIRST EARL OF SHAFTES- 
BURY (162I-1683) . . . -23 

Fioni a painting by Joint Green JiiJt, in the National Poiirait Gallery. 



SIR WILLIAM TEMPLE (1628-1699) . . ' ^7 

From a painting by Sir Peter Lely, in the National Poiirait Gallery 

JUDGE JEFFREYS (1648-1689). . . .29 

From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

ARCHBISHOP SANCROFT (1616-1693) . . 35 

From a painting by Lnttercl, in the National Portrait Gallety. 

THOMAS HOBBES (OF MALMESBURY) (1588-1679) . 39 

From a painting by J. M. Wright, in the National Portrait Galleiy. 



xvi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704) . . . -41 

Fiom an engraving after Sir Godfrey Kneller. {Lodge's Portraits.) 

WILLIAM in. (1650-1702) . . . -63 

From a painting by j/%n Wyck, in the National Podrait Gallery. 

THE GREAT DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH (1650-1722) . 7 1 
From a painting by Closterman, in the National Portrait Gallery. 

CHARLES MONTAGU (hALIFAX) (1661-1715) . . 85 

From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

LORD SOMERS (1651-1716) . . . .89 

From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

LAURENCE HYDE, EARL OF ROCHESTER (164T-T711) . 99 

From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

ROBERT HARLEY, EARL OF OXFORD (1661-T724) . II3 

From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

SIR ROBERT WALPOLE ( 1 676- 1 745) . . .121 

From a painting by J. B. Van Loo, in the National Portrait Gallery. 

HENRY ST. JOHN (bOLINGBROKE) (1678-1751) . 133 

From an engraving after Sir Godfrey Kneller. {Lodge's Poiiraits.) 

WILLIAM PULTENEY (bATH) (1682-1764) . . 159 

From a painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

statue of lord chatham (1708-1778) in st. 

Stephen's hall, Westminster . . .167 

By D. Macdowell, R.A. 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



XVU 



EARL TEMPLE (171I-1779) 

Froin an old print. 



PAGE 

169 



THOMAS, DUKE OF NEWCASTLE (1715-1768) . 

From an engraving after William Hoare. (Lodge's Portraits.) 



173 



THE EARL OF BUTE (1713-1792) 
From a painting by Sir ^oslma Reynolds. 



185 



EDMUND BURKE (1729-1797) 

From an engraving after Sir yosluia Reynolds. 



. 191 



GEORGE GRENVILLE (1712-1770) 

From an engraving after Ridley. (Vernor & Hood's edition of the 
"Letters of Junius," 1805.) 



193 



JOHN WILKES (1727-1797) .... 195 

Portrait by Hogarih. 

CHIEF JUSTICE PRATT (CAMDEn) (1713-1794) 199 

From an engraving after Hoptvood. (" Letters of Junius.") 



LORD ROCKINGHAM (1730-1782) 
From an engraving after B. Wilson. 



213 



STATUE OF LORD MANSFIELD (1705-1793), IN ST. 



Stephen's hall, Westminster . 

By E. H. Bailey, R.A. 



FREDERICK, LORD NORTH (1733-1792) 

From an engraving after Nathaniel Dance. {Lodge's Portraits.) 



227 



BENJAMIN FRANKLIN (1707-1790) 
From an engraving after Duplessis. 



231 



LORD SHELBURNE (1737-1805) 

From a painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 



247 



XVUl LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

DEAN SWIFT (1667-1745) . . . -251 

Engraved by Vanhaecken, from a drawing by Markham, after Biiidon. 

WILLIAM PITT (1759-T806) .... 285 

From a painting by John Hoppner, R.A., in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

RIGHT HON. HENRY GRATTAN (1746-1820) . 3^1 

From an engraving by Godby. 

I 

LORD CASTLEREAGH (1769-1822) . . 313 

From a painting by Sir Tlios. Lawrence, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

SIR FRANCIS BURDETT (1770-1844) . . . 321 

From a painting by Shee, in the National Poiirait Gallery. 

THOMAS PAINE (1737-1809) .... 327 

From a portrait by Jarvis, in the possession of Moncnre Daniel 
Conway. 

THOMAS, LORD ERSKINE (1750-1823). . . 329 

From a painting by Sir William Ross, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

RIGHT HON. GEORGE CANNING (1770-1827) . . 337 

Bnst by Chantrey, in the National Portrait Gallery. 

JOSEPH HUME (1777-1855) . . . .339 

From a painting by J. W. Walton, in the National PoHrait Gallery. 

DANIEL O'CONNELL, M.P. (1775-1847) . . 345 

From a painting by David Wilkie. 

LORD ELDON (1751-1838) .... 349 

From a painting by Sir Thos. Lawrence, P.R.A., in the National 
Poiirait Gallery. 

RIGHT HON. SIR ROBERT PEEL, BART. (1788-1850) 353 
From a painting by Linnell, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS XIX 

PAGE 

LORD BROUGHAM (1779-1868) . . . 355 

Frovx a painting by Raines Lonsdale, in the National Portrait 
Galkry. 

LORD JOHN RUSSELL (1792-1878) . . . 359 

Profit a painting by Sir Francis Grant, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

THE GREAT DUKE OF WELLINGTON (1769-1852) . 365 

Frojn Siborne's '■''History o/tke Waterloo Ca7npaign!''' 

CHARLES, EARL GREY (1764-1845) . . . 369 

From a painting by Sir Thos. Lawrence, in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

WILLIAM WILBERFORCE, M.P. (1759-1833) . . 377 

From a painting by J. Rising. 




PARLIAMENTARY ENGLAND 



THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 



It is the business of this book to explain how 
that system of government which came into force 
in England with the Restoration of Charles II. in 
1660 was changed, in the course of one hundred and 
seventy years, into the system which was in force at 
the passing of the Reform Bill, and which, with 
some modifications, is in force at the present day. 
In the first place, therefore, it is necessary to explain 
how England was governed in the years which fol- 
lowed the return of the Stuarts. 

The system of the Restoration represents, of 
course, the reaction after the Great Civil War. That 
war had been fought by people who were very much 
in earnest. The two irreconcilable ideals, loyalty 
to a person and loyalty to a faith, had clashed in 
the shock of battle ; and victory had been given to 
the higher creed. Slowly, but surely, the conduct of 



5 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

affairs had passed into the hands of the stern en- 
thusiasts who cared much for principles and Httle 
for men ; whose watchwords were Righteousness 
and Duty. Of that Httle band, Cromwell was the 
champion and spokesman ; and therefore he was 
carried into power. But his followers dealt faithfully 
with him ; and lost no opportunity of reminding the 
Lord Protector, that he held his office, not by any 
personal claim, but as the exponent of certain 
principles. Furthermore, they significantly hinted, 
that any trifling with carnal weakness would be 
followed by instant deposition. Cromwell, strong as 
he was, realised this perfectly well. 

Such a government could continue only on one 
condition — that it should succeed in converting the 
nation to its own exalted temper. This condition 
the government of the Commonwealth entirely failed 
to perform. In spite of his superb ability, perhaps 
by reason of it, Cromwell remained the representa- 
tive of a hopeless minority, of an aristocracy of 
vigour and enthusiasm; he never caught the imagina- 
tion of the common man. For every one of his 
subjects who heard with a glow of patriotism of the 
great exploits of English soldiers in Europe and the 
Southern Seas, or watched with pride the sailing of 
the Protector's fleet, there were a thousand who hated 
him for his avowed contempt of what he called 
superstitions, but which they reverenced as the 
traditions of their childhood, for the taxation which 
his splendid army entailed, for the perfection of his 
police system, nay, for the very efficiency of his 
administration. This last cause may seem far- 



POLICY OF CROMWELL 3 

fetched ; but it is not difficult to understand. In 
almost every system of government, there are some 
rules which are above the level of average practice. 
For example, in almost every municipal borough at 
the present day, there is a rule against driving on 
the wrong side of the road, and another against 
leaving horses unattended in the streets. Occasion- 
ally these rules are enforced ; but, in the majority of 
cases, in spite of the obvious dangers which follow 
from neglect of them, they are not obeyed. Any 
official who attempted to apply them systematically 
and completely would be driven from office by a 
storm of popular disapproval. In Cromwell's day 
they would have been rigidly enforced, to the intense 
disgust of the average man, who hates rules which 
interfere with his easy-going ways. Every fresh 
accession of knowledge which historical research 
reveals goes to show that the Cromwellian system 
was thoroughly efficient, and thoroughly unpopular. 
It was, in fact, only maintained at all by the 
personal genius of Cromwell, who administered an 
impossible policy in the least impossible form. 
When he died, the strained bow flew back. Cowed 
by its recent experiences, the nation hesitated, for 
some fifteen months, to show its real mind. During 
this interval, the merest shadow dance of hollow 
spectres filled the stage at Westminster. But at last 
there came a man who laid his finger on the national 
pulse, and found it beating with hope of a return to 
the good old times, the old social and political order 
handed down from generation to generation, when 
each man knew his place ^nd kept it, and when 



4 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

neighbours could meet together without quarrelling 
about the condition of things in high quarters. 
Most of the old grievances were forgotten — the 
exactions of Charles' revenue officers, the tyranny of 
the bishops' courts, the pressing of men for hopeless 
wars, the billetting of soldiers, and the like. The past 
was inv^ested with a golden halo, which hid all these 
things from sight. The leading courtiers looked, no 
doubt, for place and power. The clergy hoped to 
return to their parsonages and their stalls. The 
royalist lawyers who had compromised with the 
enemy by confining themselves to chamber practice, 
and by instructing their clerks to write "Oliver" with 
a little " o," I saw before them visions of great law- 
suits, and noble opportunities of forensic eloquence. 
All these, no doubt, had urgent reasons for desiring a 
Restoration. But these reasons had existed any time 
for ten years without bringing back the King. The 
real power behind Monk and the Convention Parlia- 
ment of 1660, was the passionate desire of the 
nation to return to the good old times. 

Charles and his friends must have known some- 
thing of all this. As a matter of fact, Charles, like 
his father before him, was a representative man. 
The father represented the spirit which produced 
the Civil War — the deep religious enthusiasm, the 
determined, if mistaken, ideal of loyalty, the strong 
militant ardour which will fight a hopeless struggle 
rather than give way. The son represented the 

^ The stoty is told of Sir Geoffrey Palmer, who made a great name 
as a conveyancer during the Commonwealth, and who became the 
first Attorney-General of the Restoration. 



CONVENTION PARLIAMENT 5 

Spirit which the Civil War had produced — the 
disbeHef in ideals, the acceptance of material 
comfort as the one thing really certain, the unscrupu- 
lous abandonment of principles in the face of temp- 
tation. And so Charles II. and his people were, in 
1660, really suited to one another. 

But it took some time to discover this truth. The 
King, most of whose life had been spent abroad, 
knew little of the people ; the people knew little of 
the King. The real secret of Charles' security lay 
in the double fact, that the nation was prepared to 
submit to almost anything rather than re-kindle 
the flame of civil war, while the King was prepared 
to yield almost anything rather than, as he himself 
expressed it, set out on his travels again. But until 
this bond of security became apparent, the returned 
exiles seemed determined to profit by the stern 
experience of the war. 

The statesman who most completely expressed 
this cautious policy was the Earl of Clarendon. 
His view of the situation was, emphatically, that of 
a lawyer. Every exercise of political authority since 
the late King left London in January, 1642, he 
regarded as a mere nullity. Even where it was 
manifestly impossible to ignore the deeds of the 
Commonwealth, as, for example, in the abolition of 
feudal tenures, he demanded that the change should 
be sanctioned afresh by Act of Parliament. Nay, he 
even required that the proceedings of the Convention 
Parliament itself, that very Parliament which had 
recalled the King, should be confirmed by its suc- 
cessor, because the Convention Parliament had 



6 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

assembled without the royal summons. On the other 
hand, he professed to regard the earlier Acts of the 
Long Parliament, which had received the royal assent, 
as legally binding, though they had manifestly been 
forced upon the Crown in a time of revolution. 
Thus, he took pains to require the formal repeal of 
the Act which had prohibited the bishops sitting in 
the House of Lords, and the famous Triennial Act 
of 1641. 

By this cautious policy, the Restoration govern- 
ment at first dissociated itself from the extremists on 
both sides. It made no attempt to go behind the 
Parliamentary triumphs of the reforming party, such 
as the Petition of Right and the abolition of the 
Star Chamber ; and so it gave no encouragement to 
the high prerogative school of Strafford and Laud. 
But, after a little hesitation, it definitely abandoned 
the hopes of religious toleration held out by the 
Declaration of Breda, and, instead of providing a 
liberty for tender consciences, it strengthened the 
Elizabethan policy of Uniformity. It procured from 
the royalist Parliament of 1661 an Act which 
excluded all Nonconformists from municipal office, a 
second Act which forbade them to hold meetings for 
purposes of worship, and a third which prohibited 
their ministers acting as schoolmasters, or even 
residing within five miles of a corporate town. The 
more extreme pretensions of the old Parliamentarian 
party, to control the choice of the King's ministers 
and to criticise the administration of public affairs, 
it studiously ignored ; and it was not happy until 
the famous army of the Commonwealth, which was 




EDWARD HYDE, EARL OF CLARENDON (1608-1674). 
From an engraving after Sir Peter Lely. 



8 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

justly regarded, despite its correct behaviour, as a 
formidable relic of Puritanism, was disbanded. 

And so, to all appearance, the ancient life of 
England resumed its quiet course. In the country, 
the Puritan Justices were replaced by Cavaliers, and 
the Crown took care to prick as sheriffs only such 
men as were known to be thoroughly loyal to it. In 
the hands of Sheriff and Justices lay practically the 
whole of the rural government, except when the 
judges from Westminster came round on circuit. 
The sheriff and his officers tracked out persons 
accused of crime, apprehended them, and brought 
them before the Justices, who, if the offence charged 
was serious, committed them to prison, or let them 
out on bail, to await their trial before the judges 
of assize ; if it was less weighty, disposed finally 
of the case in Quarter Sessions. The Sheriff also 
executed all the orders of the higher courts, hanged 
the criminal condemned to death, sold the goods of 
the debtor who would not or could not pay, and put 
the victorious litigant into peaceful possession of the 
disputed estate. The Sheriff also presided in the 
Small Debts Court of the shire, and, more important 
still, at the election of members of Parliament for the 
county. Even the return of borough members passed 
through his hands ; and it was this electoral function 
which made the character of the sheriffs a matter of 
such vital interest to the Crown. For, though, in 
theory, the Sheriff was a mere ministerial official, yet, 
in fact, he had no small influence in election results. 
As a revenue official, also, the Sheriff still accounted 
for the ("ferm" or dues of the shire, the profits of 



RURAL GOVERNMENT 9 

wardships and escheats, treasure trove, fines for venial 
offences, and other casual items ; though the rapidly 
growing army of Exchequer officials threatened to 
render his financial duties unimportant. 

In the hands of the Justices of the Peace lay a 
vast miscellaneous authority, which tended to in- 
crease with every fresh development of national 
policy. From the beginning of their existence in 
the early fourteenth century, they had been specially 
charged with the preservation of the peace, and the 
punishment of petty assaults. At the break up of 
the medieval system of serfdom, which followed on 
the plague of the late fourteenth century, the 
regulation of the ever-increasing class of day 
labourers, rural and urban, was placed in their hands. 
It was they who enforced the stern rules against 
vagabondage laid down by the early Tudor statutes, 
and the apprenticeship policy of Elizabeth. The 
Age of Elizabeth had also handed over to them the 
control of that vast system of poor relief, which was 
summed up by the great statute of 1601. In each 
parish the poor law funds were levied and adminis- 
tered by the overseers, but the appointment of the 
overseers and the enforcement of their duties were 
in the hands of the Justices of the Peace. Such 
scanty elements of a sanitary law as the country 
enjoyed were likewise enforced, if at all, by the 
Justices.! The Reformation, which had brought in 

' The student who reads the contemporaiy histories of this period will 
notice frequent references to " Commissioners of Sewers." But these 
officials were concerned only with the drainage of land for agricultural 
purposes. 



lO THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

its train a whole elaborate scheme of statutes, aimed 
at securing outward conformity to the rites of the 
EstabHshed Church, had left the enforcement of 
its policy, at any rate since the abolition of the 
Court of High Commission, mainly to the Justices of 
the Peace ; and the Restoration statutes, while giving 
back to the ecclesiastical courts much of the jurisdic- 
tion which had been taken away from them by the 
Long Parliament, wisely refrained from entrusting to 
the clergy the carrying out of the penal laws against 
Roman Catholic and Protestant Nonconformists. 
Finally, although one of the first acts of the royalist 
Parliament of 1661 was, to declare that the supreme 
command of all the armed forces of the country was 
vested in the Crown, the same body expressly 
committed the control and management of the 
local militia to the Lieutenants of the counties and 
their deputies, who were, in fact, the most important 
men amongst the Justices of the Peace. 

In the corporate towns, which had been the strong- 
holds of the Puritan cause, at any rate in the later 
stages of the war, the King's advisers had a more 
difficult game to play. Although, here too, the 
Justices of the Peace exercised considerable authority,^ 
and it was easy to ensure that they should be well 
affected to the Government, there existed, alongside 
of these, important bodies of elected officials such as 
mayor, aldermen, and common councillors, who, by 

' There appears to be some little doubt whether the borough 
Justices were not, in some cases, elected by the inhabitants. But 
it is very significant that the Corporation Act of 166 1 takes no 
precautions against them. 



MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT II 

their power to make by-laws, their control of the 
town funds, and their influence in parliamentary 
elections, were capable of proving dangerous op- 
ponents of the Court Stringent measures were 
accordingly taken to ensure the exclusion of un- 
desirable men from such posts. Not only were all 
holders of office compelled to take the oaths of 
supremacy and allegiance ; they were further obliged, 
upon pain of exclusion from their places, to swear 
that they regarded all resistance to the Crown, under 
whatever circumstances, as unlawful, and to declare 
that they held the famous Covenant to be of no 
binding force. But this was not all. By an almost 
unprecedented surrender of the rights of the subject, 
the Corporation Act of 1661 authorised the King 
to create a Commission of Visitors, who should have 
power, for nearly two years, to remove, at their un- 
controlled discretion, all municipal officers, (whether 
they were willing to take the oaths or not,) whose 
continuance in office they deemed to be inexpedient 
for the public safety, and to replace them by any 
others who had been previously ejected. The 
royalist writers are, for the most part, discreetly 
silent about the use which was made of this extra- 
ordinary power ; but, as the Corporation Act goes on 
to exclude from all future holding of office every 
person who fails to take the sacrament according to 
the rites of the Church of England, it can hardly be 
doubted that the Commission was aimed at the total 
exclusion of dissenters from municipal office. When 
we consider further the character of the Conventicle 
Acts of 1664 and 1670, which prohibited, under 



12 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

severe penalties, all assemblies for religious worship 
otherwise than in the churches of the Establishment, 
and which, though general in their operation, must 
have been most severely felt in the great centres of 
population, and, finally, the Five Mile Act of 
1665, which prohibited all Nonconformist ministers 
coming within five miles of a Corporate town until 
they had taken the oath of non-resistance, it will be 
easy to realise, that if the government of the Restora- 
tion did not succeed in tuning the Corporations as 
effectually as Elizabeth had succeeded in tuning the 
pulpits, it was not for lack of strenuous endeavour. 

If we turn from the local authorities to the central 
government in London, we shall recognise the same 
policy of adhesion to the letter of the law, combined 
with a determination to keep the control of affairs in 
the hands of the *' well-affected." His enemies said 
that Clarendon was no lawyer ; and it may well be 
that his knowledge of the details of ordinary legal 
practice was limited. But he had an essentially legal 
mind ; and his long study of the sham business of an 
exiled Court had brought him to regard forms as of 
the utmost importance. Now, in form, the English 
Constitution, at the outbreak of the Civil War, was a 
monarchy, in which, no doubt, the action of the King 
was expressly limited by certain solemn enactments, 
but in which every exercise of State authority was 
effected in the name of the King, and in which every 
other organ of the central authority — Parliament, 
Privy Council, Admiralty Board, Treasury, Chancery, 
even the Law Courts — was a mere satellite of the 
Crown, brought into existence to act as its humble 



METHODS OF CLARENDON 1 3 

adviser and helper, not as a rival, or even as a critic 
of the Crown's authority. It is greatly to Clarendon's 
honour, that he made a practical exception to this 
rule in the case of the Law Courts. The subser- 
vience of the judges in the early days of the struggle 
between Crown and Parliament, seems to have been 
condemned by all moderate men ; and the growing 
practice of appointing the judges for life, instead of 
merely at the pleasure of the King, was doing much 
to strengthen the wholesale feeling of judicial in- 
dependence. Unhappily, the practice was not made 
compulsory until the passing of the Act of Settlement 
in 1700, an omission to which may be attributed 
many of the evils of the later days of the Stuart rule. 
But still, both the Commonwealth and the Restora- 
tion governments seem to have been sincerely 
anxious to raise the dignity of the judicial bench ; 
and, in the many changes which took flace between 
1640 and 1660, there seems to have been little breach 
of continuity in the roll of the judges. 

In all other respects, however, there was a complete 
break between the policy of the Restoration and the 
policy of the Long Parliament. The Reformers of 
1640 had desired to establish a Commonwealth in 
which all questions of first importance should be 
decided by votes of the elected House, and all 
details of administration supervised by a Council of 
State which .should be, in effect, a Committee of that 
House. Moreover, Parliament was to retain in its own 
hands the appointment of public officials. This was 
actually the system in force from the outbreak of the 
Civil War until the day on which Cromwell's dragoons 



14 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

turned the last remnant of the Long Parliament out 
of doors. There had been a faint attempt to revive 
it on the death of Cromwell. But Clarendon would 
have none of it. He might have pointed out, with 
great force, that the system had not been able to 
maintain itself even during the absence of a King. 
He preferred to say, that the system was clearly 
illegal, and that, by the evidence of countless 
documents and forms of speech, Parliament was 
merely the advisory Council of the monarch in 
matters of legislation and taxation. It was true, 
that, by the same law to which Clarendon appealed, 
any atternpt by the Crown to legislate or to tax 
without the consent of Parliament was condemned. 
But if the King did not desire to legislate or to 
impose taxes, he might comply with all the require- 
ments of the law by merely calling Parliament 
together for a brief session once every three years. ^ 
Had the force of circumstances permitted, there is 
little doubt that Clarendon would have advised the 
King to keep as near this minimum as possible. In 
Parliament as an organ of good government, he had 
no belief whatsoever, even though the severe measures 
taken with the borough constituencies, and the 
exaction of the Oath of Supremacy from newly 
elected members, rendered it difficult for Catholics 
or Nonconformists to gain admission. 

There was, however, one important fact, which 
rendered Clarendon's views on the relations of Crown 

^ The Statute of 1664, which repealed the Triennial Act of the 
Long Parliament, still expressly forbade the intermission of Parliament 
for longer than this period. 



Crown revenues 15 

and Parliament practically untenable. This fact was, 
that the Civil War had destroyed the last shred of the 
financial independence of the Crown. With the steady 
fall in the value of money, and the steady growth of 
the expense of government, the Crown had come 
more and more to depend upon Parliament for the 
means of existence. A grant of taxation, at one 
time looked upon as an exceptional measure, giving 
ground for a strong suspicion that the monarch had 
been wantonly extravagant, gradually became a 
normal feature of every session of Parliament. The 
last desperate struggle of Charles I. to reign indepen- 
dently of Parliament had broken down before the 
sheer necessity of filling the royal coffers. The taxa- 
tion of Cromwell had been thorough and regular ; and 
Charles II. was not likely to be more frugal than 
Cromwell. Finally, the feudal revenues,^ once the 
main stay of the independent income of the Crown, 
had been swept away by the Commonwealth govern- 
ment; and the Cavalier Parliament of the Restoration, 
much as it hated the Puritans and their ways, had not 
the slightest hesitation in affirming a measure which 
relieved the landowners from a chief part of their 
liabilities to the State. It is true that a liberal com- 
pensation had been granted to the Crown in the shape 
of an hereditary excise upon beer, wines, and spirits ; 

^ These were a numerous list of casual items due to the Crown as 
supreme landowner in the kingdom, from all persons whose estates had 
originally been granted to them by the Crown, on condition of military 
service. They included such vexatious items as the right to the ward- 
ship of infant heirs, the values of heiresses' marriages, the privilege of 
seizing provisions and carts for the royal household, and the like. 



1 6 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

and that, in pursuance of ancient precedent, the 
Customs Revenue had been settled on the King for 
Hfe. But, in this latter gift, the Commons inserted a 
significant warning that no extension of the list of 
dutiable articles (technically known as the " Book of 
Rates "), much less any increase in the rates of duty, 
could be looked for except from the favour of the 
Lower House. And, as a matter of fact, before the 
end of the first year of his reign, Charles was obliged 
to come to Parliament, hat in hand, on more than one 
occasion. 

It was the fond belief of Clarendon, that this state 
of things would only be temporary. Once let the 
enormous expense of disbanding the Commonwealth 
army be discharged, the accumulated debts of exile 
paid, the pardonable extravagances of new possession 
overcome, then surely the natural increase of trade 
under a lawful monarch would manifest itself in the 
increase of Customs and Excise, and all would be well. 
But the happy day never came. As the Court began to 
realise the temper of the nation, the outward decency 
of the early years faded before the growing spirit of 
reckless extravagance and immorality. In the ex- 
pressive language of the time, " the pudding began to 
creep, and all must needs have a share." Money voted 
for public purposes was squandered by the King on 
mistresses and courtiers. The pension list grew at an 
appalling rate. Jobbery and robbery filled the public 
offices, and emptied the public coffers. The claims of 
the Crown were neglected, except where a large per- 
centage of the receipts went into private pockets. 
The claims against the Crown were either ignored 



CJ^OIVN EXPENDITURE 1 7 

altogether, or satisfied two or three times over. The 
more impudent the demand, the more Hkely to meet 
with success. To the extravagances of peace was 
added the cost of war. Clarendon himself reckoned, 
that the expense of the fleet had multiplied itself 
tenfold since the accession of the King's father. And 
yet the seamen were always clamouring for their wages. 
And so it was necessary, not to extinguish Parlia- 
ment, but to conciliate it. And at this point the 
legality of the Chancellor gave way. In strict law, 
he ought to have appeared as the King's representa- 
tive before the Houses, and, in a formal speech, have 
named the sum which his Majesty desired of his 
faithful people. Neither Clarendon, nor Southampton 
(the Treasurer), nor Ashley (the Chancellor of the 
Exchequer), was a member of the Commons ; and 
it was grossly unconstitutional of them, as matters 
then stood, to attempt to influence the debates of that 
House. But the risks of the old method were too 
great. It would not do to incur a refusal. It was 
necessary that Ministers should be kept in touch 
with the changing temper of the Commons, should be 
able to give assurances and promises on behalf of the 
Crown, and should bring to bear upon members all 
the Court influence which in that day meant so 
much. In other words, the House had to be 
" managed " ; and the Chancellor, dignified as he 
was, did not disdain entirely the arts of management. 
But he was not an adept in the business. His practice 
was to summon a few of the " well-affected " members 
to meet himself and the Treasurer at fairly frequent 
intervals during the session, and to read them homilies 



1 8 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

on the behaviour of the House. The members thus 
favoured, for the most part respectable Cavaher 
squires, did their best to follow the Chancellor's 
lead, but without much success. They were not 
supple enough ; they found a new and frivolous 
element in the House, an element which professed 
unbounded loyalty to the King, but which desired to 
see its loyalty openly recognised. 

The opportunity thus afforded was seized by a new 
type of politician, or, rather, by a new development of 
political ambition. The professed courtier, who, in 
former reigns, would have shrunk from contact with 
anything so vulgar- as the business of the Commons, 
now found his element in studying it. He realised very 
well, that the King, with his cynical selfishness, would 
welcome help from whatever quarter it came, and 
would reward it in strict proportion to its usefulness. 
The help which Charles needed could generally be 
expressed in one word — money. For money he was 
willing to sink his honour, his dignity, his royal 
position ; and he was prodigal in his favours if he 
had money in prospect. What was needed was a 
link between the Court and the House of Commons,* 
but a link which should not be too conspicuous. It 
was exactly the post for an adventurer. Men like 
Bennet and Will. Coventry first made themselves 
acceptable in small offices to the King, then procured 
seats in the Commons by royal influence, then set 
themselves steadily to work to make a Court party in 
the House. If a member showed signs of aptitude, he 
was assiduously cultivated by these new missionaries, 
taken to kiss the King's hand, his head turned by 



THE COURT PARTY I9 

gracious words from royal lips and gracious glances 
from semi-royal eyes. He heard himself extolled as 
a man of the most prodigious parts, though in all 
probability his former friends had been stupid enough 
to treat him as an ordinary person. Visions of stars 
and titles floated before his eyes. He regarded his 
new friends as better guides to the royal wishes than 
the ostensible Ministers, who merely communicated 
their orders at second hand, and who never brought 
him within the sacred circle of royalty. 

A moment's thought will show the strength of the 
position held by men like Bennet and Coventry. 
They alone knew the minds of both parties to the 
bargain. A few gracious and vague words from the 
monarch, a few profound reverences from his sup- 
porters in the House — these were the only points of 
direct contact between the bargainers. The real 
business was settled by discussions in the King's 
closet, and by whisperings in the lobbies of the 
House. But on these occasions the parties were 
not face to face. Everything depended on the 
reports of the intermediaries. What was to prevent 
Coventry from glossing the words of the King to 
the members, or exaggerating the promises of the 
members to the King ? It was of the very nature 
of the transaction that misunderstandings could not 
be explained. The parties were at the mercy of the 
connecting link. And so it came about that the 
Commons often voted, not what the King really 
wished, still less what his ostensible Ministers wished, 
but what the Court party had been given to under- 
stand that the King wished. In other words, the 



20 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

King and the Commons were puppets in the hands 
of unscrupulous intriguers. 

But, of course, the conquest of the Commons, and 
even of the King, did not mean the acquisition of 
supreme power. So long as the great offices of State 
were held by men like Clarendon, Southampton, 
Ormond, or even like Monk, the power of the new 
intriguers was comparatively small. The forms of 
the constitution allotted the busir.ess of State among 
these great officials ; and it had been judicially 
decided, as early as the reign of Elizabeth, that even 
the personal act of the Crown was invalid unless it 
was expressed by the proper official in the proper way. 
A royal grant of an office or pension was worthless 
unless it was duly authenticated by the Great Seal, 
the custody of which was the special privilege of the 
Chancellor. A royal order for payment of a sum of 
money was invalid unless it was supported by the 
warrant of the Treasurer. Charles's courtiers talked 
loudly of the indignity suffered by a monarch whose 
personal will was thus thwarted ; and it may well be 
doubted whether even Clarendon or Southampton 
would actually have refused to issue the necessary 
forms on the personal command of the King. But 
they could, and did, refuse to issue them on the 
application of courtiers, even though that application 
were supported by the royal handwriting. And 
Charles, at any rate in the earlier years of his reign, 
had some faint sense of shame, which prevented him 
overruling the firm and (it may be) somewhat prolix 
remonstrances of his faithful Ministers, when he knew 
himself to be entirely in the wrong. 



THE PRIVY COUNCIL ' 21 

But there was a weak spot in Clarendon's armour ; 
and his rivals were not slow to detect it. Although 
the Ministers were the servants of the Crown, and 
were entitled, as such, to individual access to and 
to orders from the Crown, they could, by unques- 
tioned law, be summoned by the Crown to take 
part in a general discussion in the Privy Council. 
Clarendon himself had recognised the necessity for 
a continuance, and even for a revival, of this ancient 
institution, if only as a counterpoise to unworthy 
favourites whom the Crown, from personal predilection, 
might invest with some of the great offices of State. 
He had even, with some reluctance, consented to the 
formation of a secret committee of the Council, for the 
discussion of matters oi the weightiest importance, 
such as could not be entrusted to the entire body. 
But he had not foreseen that this secret committee 
might be used as a lever to induce the King to 
overrule the views of his Ministers ; and he was 
beyond measure disgusted when the King proceeded 
to admit the new political intriguers, not merely to 
membership of the Council, but to membership of the 
secret committee. Yet it was impossible to deny the 
constitutional right of the King to summon any of his 
subjects to the Privy Council ; and even Clarendon 
himself would have admitted the importance of keep- 
ing the House of Commons in harmony with the 
Executive Government. The mischief of the arrange- 
ment lay in the possibilities of abuse which it opened 
up ; and especially in the fact that it was really 
introduced by unscrupulous intriguers for their own 
selfish ends. One of the first results of its introduction 



22 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

was, to enable Sir George Downing to procure the 
insertion in a Bill of Supply of the famous clause 
appropriating the sums voted by the Commons to 
specific purposes — a step which at once threatened a 
national bankruptcy, because it repudiated the claims 
of the bankers who had advanced money on the faith 
of the incoming revenue. Clarendon himself has left 
a vivid, almost a pathetic picture of the meeting at 
which the step was forced upon a bedridden Chan- 
cellor and a gouty Treasurer by the glib arguments 
of the courtiers ; and the scene is really vital, for it 
marks the triumph of the new order over the old. 
Moreover, unworthy as were the motives of the 
propounders, the scheme was, in truth, the precursor 
of two fundamental institutions of English politics — 
the financial control of the House of Commons, and 
the existence of a National Bank. 

The crisis came in the year 1667, when, on the 
death of Southampton, the King, against the 
strenuous remonstrances of Clarendon, refused to 
appoint a new Lord Treasurer, and put the Treasury 
into Commission in the hands of Clifford, Coventry, 
Ashley, and Buncombe. The first three were Parlia- 
mentary intriguers of the new type, the last a respec- 
table country squire who, as a tool of Coventry, lent an 
appearance of respectability to the Treasury Board, 
without offering any serious check to the policy of 
the other members. This momentous step was 
followed, after a few months, by the impeachment 
and fall of Clarendon himself, sacrificed to the out- 
burst of indignation aroused by the attempt of De 
Ruyter on London. It seems strange that so 




Photo by'\ \\Valker d^ Cocker ell. 

ANTHONY ASHLEY COOPER, FIRST EARL OF SHAFTESBURY (162I-1683). 

Portrait by John Greenhill, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



24 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

shrewd a man as Charles should not have seen 
that, in dismissing Clarendon and admitting the 
Cabal to office, he was really losing a servant and 
gaining a master. Perhaps he did see it, and did 
not care, believing that he would always be able 
to secure good terms for himself from the new rulers 
of the State. For, however divided amongst them- 
selves, however innocent of principle, the new 
Ministers resembled a modern Cabinet in this 
important fact — that they hoped to govern England 
according to their own views, and not according to 
the views of the King. The initiative in policy was 
passing from the Crown to the Ministry. Clarendon 
was almost the last of the medieval type of Minister, 
who set devotion to the Crown as the first political 
duty. There was a brief revival of this older type 
with Danby, and a more successful, though still 
more belated attempt, with North. But the political 
gamblers of 1667, the Cliffords, the Arlingtons, the 
Buckinghams, the Coventrys, the Ashleys, were really 
the pioneers of a new system, the development of 
which was to be the task of English statesmanship 
for the next two hundred years. Their achievement 
is only one of many examples which seem to prove, 
that there is no necessary connection between morals 
and politics. 

It is not, however, superfluous to point out, 
although it has been done before, that the Cabal 
Ministry of 1667, while it must undoubtedly be 
reckoned as a distinct advance towards the modern 
system, was yet very different from the Cabinet of 
the nineteenth century. Its meetings were, indeed, 



THE CABAL 2$ 

secret ; it had no formal place in the Constitution ; 
and it was supposed to be busily engaged in wire- 
pulling. The name of Cabal was probably given to 
it for the first of these qualities, from the Italian 
word Cabala (secret society), which had been 
naturalised in England for nearly a century. The 
word " Cabinet," in an almost equivalent sense, was 
nearly as old. The accident that the initials of the 
chief members of the Ministry of 1667 happened to 
spell the former word, no doubt helped the title to 
stick, and rendered the word itself unpopular after 
the fall of the Ministry. 

But the Cabal differed from a modern Cabinet in 
owning no allegiance to the majority in the House 
of Commons, in having no common policy, and, 
above all, in having no recognised head. It is not 
a little curious that Clarendon had, according to his 
own account, ostentatiously refused the suggestion, 
made a year or two after the Restoration, 
that he should assume the title of First Minister, 
after the model of the French system, then very 
much in favour with Charles and his personal 
friends. And it is worth noting that the shade of 
Mazarin afterwards took an ample revenge for the 
indignity, by fastening the French word "Premier" 
upon the English chief Minister. 

Never, in fact, was there a wilder medley of incon- 
sistent measures than the doings of the Cabal. A 
definite Protestant policy was expressed in the Triple 
Alliance of 1668, and in the Bill to comprehend 
Nonconformists in the Church. But a revival of 
the Conventicle Act in 1670 showed the power of 



26 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

the High Anghcans, only to be followed by the 
Treaty of Dover and the public toleration and 
protection of Catholics by the King and his brother. 
The climax was reached in 1676, when the Duke of 
York made a formal profession of Catholicism. But 
this last step, although it produced a reaction which 
led to the passing of the Test Act in 1673, ^.nd the 
fall of the Cabal in the same year, did not, as it 
would have done a century later, find an organised 
Opposition ready to take office. On the contrary, it 
seemed to destroy the new system at a blow, and to 
enable the Crown to revert to the older state of things, 
by the appointment of Danby as Lord Treasurer. 

The check was, however, only temporary. The 
first passionate outburst of loyalty to the Crown 
provoked by the Restoration had grown somewhat 
cold under the shadow of the corruption and 
debauchery which followed the fall of Clarendon. 
In the storm of indignation aroused by the inge- 
niously exploited Popish Plot, the personal popularity 
of Charles fell to its lowest ebb. The Parliament of 
1679 outspokenly condemned the action of the Court, 
and carried through their impeachment of Danby in 
the teeth of the royal pardon. The whole country 
was profoundly stirred by the controversy over the 
Exclusion Bill, by which it was proposed to exclude 
the Duke of York from the succession on the ground 
of his religion. Once more Parliament was divided 
into sharply hostile parties ; the supporters of the 
Exclusion Bill, or "Petitioners," maintaining the 
right of Parliament to alter, for weighty reasons, 
the succession to the throne, the opponents of the 




Photo by\ [ Walker &> Cocker ell. 

SIR WILLIAM TEMPLE (1628-1699). 

Portrait by Sir Peter Lely, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



28 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

measure, the " Abhorrers," stoutly asserting the 
indefeasible character of hereditary right. In this 
division reappears the old cleavage of the Civil War, 
with this important difference — that both parties alike 
accept the main outlines of the existing order, and 
disagree only about details. Like their predecessors, 
the Cavaliers, the " Abhorrers " professed special 
loyalty to the King, and thus anticipated the attitude 
of the Tories, their successors. Like their predeces- 
sors, the Puritans, the " Petitioners " thought more 
of principles than of men ; but, unlike them, they 
were not prepared to abolish existing institutions. 
Thus they foreshadowed their Whig successors, who 
were loyal to the Crown, though claiming for Parlia- 
ment the right to choose its wearer. 

As the line of cleavage became clearer, a new band 
of politicians, worthy of the name of statesmen, 
grew up in the place of the intriguers who had 
caused the fall of Clarendon. The private life of 
Rochester was, no doubt, scandalous ; but in public 
life he was not without principle. Sunderland was, 
no doubt, unscrupulous ; but he was not a mere 
political pirate. Temple, Essex, Halifax, and 
Somers were men of real political worth, to whose 
hands the ship of State might safely be entrusted. 
Temple's scheme of 1679, to place all executive 
authority in the hands of a Council of Thirty, 
unworkable as this scheme was, points definitely 
to the consummation desired by the first political 
thinkers of the day. It had become clear that 
supreme power could be entrusted, neither to a 
monarch who might be an unprincipled man of 




Photo by\ \lValker &= Cocker ell. 

JUDGE JEFFREYS (1648-168Q). 

Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



30 THE POLITICS OF THE RESTORATION 

pleasure, nor to a factious House of Commons, nor 
to an irresponsible Junto of political gamblers. 
The problem was, to find some scheme which 
should combine the advantages of all these alterna- 
tives, while avoiding their defects. Temple's plan 
was obviously imperfect, for his Council had neither 
the unity of a single mind, nor the cohesion of a 
Junto, nor the stability of^a representative Chamber. 
For long years the nation was to wander in the 
desert of experiment. But some of the clearer 
eyes began to discern the Promised Land. 

The eight years which elapsed between the 
publication of Temple's scheme and the landing of 
William of Orange were fruitful in political teaching. 
The monarchy of the Stuarts was rapidly hastening 
to its doom, and revealing to an incredulous nation 
the possibilities of evil which lay within the power 
of a jure divino King. The shameful sale of the 
country to France, the tampering with the judicial 
bench, the persecution of the municipal corporations, 
the vindictive murders of Russell and Sidney, the 
open defiance of the Test Act, the attack on the 
Universities, the collection of armed troops to over- 
awe London, the proceedings against the Seven 
Bishops, at last roused the patience of a nation 
only too reluctant to risk a revival of civil war. 
The invitation to William of Orange was signed by 
representatives of all political parties. James found 
himself without a friend in England. It was not, 
in fact, until the Revolution had been achieved, that 
its authors began to consider what they should do 
with it. 



II 



THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 



And yet, in a sense, it is profoundly true, that the 
final flight of James from Rochester was not in itself 
a Revolution, but merely the herald of a Revolution. 
Just as the real difficulties of the Puritans had begun 
with the capture and execution of James's father, so 
the real difficulties of the statesmen of 1688 began 
with the flight of James. That event had decided 
nothing, except that James himself could no longer 
occupy the throne. 

Even this last fact was, for a time, disputed. So 
strong was the mistaken sentiment of loyalty to the 
person of the King, so deep the dread of a revival of 
the horrors of civil war, that a small but influential 
body of men, under the leadership of Sherlock, the 
Master of the Temple, urged the recall of James. 
But even Sherlock did not venture to propose that 
the fugitive should be recalled without conditions. 
He had himself bravely resisted the Order in 
Council which bade the clergy read the Declaration 
of Indulgence from their pulpits ; and he was firm 



32 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

in his attachment to Protestantism. Though the 
party which he represented seems to have been 
rather wary of defining its conditions, we gather that 
at least it proposed to bind the King not to exercise 
his claim to dispense with the operation of statutes, 
nor to attempt to force Catholicism on an unwilling 
nation. Macaulay has pointed out, with great force, 
the inconsistency of Sherlock's position. He repre- 
sented those who had, until the last few months, 
urged that under no circumstances was resistance to 
the monarch lawful. Yet here he was proposing to 
resist until the monarch should give way on certain 
important points on which he (the King) conscien- 
tiously believed himself to be right. But, in truth, 
a weightier bar than the doubtful argument of 
consistency lay across Sherlock's path. How could 
his followers be sure that James would respect his 
most solemn oaths? His moral pedigree was 
terribly against him. Could men forget how his 
grandfather had thrown over his own subjects and 
his allies in the face of his pledged word ; how his 
father had played fast and loose with those who had 
honestly striven to come to terms with him — nay, 
even with his own loyal and devoted followers ; how 
his brother had taken money to carry on a war in 
alliance with the Dutch against France, and had then 
accepted money from France to desert the cause of 
the Dutch? No doubt the courtly clerics and nobles 
who acted with Sherlock were prepared to urge that 
Kings were not bound by all the rules of morality 
by which ordinary men are judged. But very i^w 
Englishmen, even in i688j were prepared to submit 



REGENCY SCHEME 33 

to a monarch who dechned to be bound by the most 
solemn public promises in matters between himself 
and his subjects. Moreover, James had none of the 
personal attractions which were too often allowed to 
weigh against the bad faith of his predecessors, 
none of the homely good-nature of his grandfather, 
none of the dignity of his father, none of the easy 
tolerance of his brother. He was morose, bigoted, 
cruel. Though he had at one time acquired a 
reputation for personal bravery, recent events had 
thrown grave doubts upon the justice of that claim. 
Finally, it was more than questionable whether he 
himself would have been willing to make even the 
least of the promises which his warmest advocates 
proposed to ask of him. At the critical moment, 
indeed, he wrote a letter to the Privy Council, which 
would have been arrogant from a victorious ruler 
who held his subjects in the hollow of his hand, but 
which, coming from a fugitive, was simply a new 
testimony to his utter incapacity to grasp the 
situation. 

A second proposal, far more specious, because far 
less open to obvious objection, and far more in 
accordance with the general character of English 
politics, was put forward by Bancroft, the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, at this time a very popular personage, 
from the fact that he had figured at Xhe head of the 
Seven Bishops, whose acquittal on a charge of 
seditious libel had been the signal for the first flight 
of James. The Primate, though his treatment by the 
King had, for the time, broken down his conviction 
of the duty of non-resistance, shrunk from every 

4 



34 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

project which looked like a forcible deposition. 
After long reflection, he had matured a proposal for 
a Regency, a scheme which, while professedly 
recognising James as King de jm^e, should allow the 
royal powers to be exercised by a guardian to be 
chosen by the nation. There was more than one 
precedent for such a plan in English history. The 
kingdom had been governed by Regents during the 
minorities of Henry III., Richard II., and Edward 
VI. ; there had been something of the kind during 
the last years of Edward II., and during the decay 
of Henry VI. It is true that, even in the first group 
of cases, in which the Regency had been exercised 
during the infancy of the monarch, the results had 
not been altogether happy. The quarrels between 
Hubert de Burgh and the foreign ecclesiastics, 
between John of Gaunt and his many rivals, 
between Somerset and Warwick, had convulsed 
the realm ; and the fictitious Eegencies of Mortimer 
and York had been even more stormy. Still, the 
Archbishop's proposal could not be treated as 
quite visionary. It appealed to a hope which 
dominated the minds of a large number of English- 
men — the hope that the present difficulty might be 
overcome without any open violation of allegiance. 
It was also, no doubt, acceptable to those members 
of Sherlock's party who saw that their own scheme 
was impossible at the moment ; for it held out a 
distinct opening for the return of James at a future 
date. A Regency is by its nature a temporary 
arrangement. It presupposes a possibility that the 
monarch may some day reach or recover a state of 




Photo by\ \}Valker &= Cockerell. 

ARCHBISHOP SANCROFT (1616-1693). 

Portrait by Lutterel, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



36 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

mind, in which he will be competent to exercise the 
powers" of royalty. 

The real objection to the scheme of a Regency 
was, that of necessity it prolonged a state of affairs 
which it was essential to put an end to at the 
earliest possible moment. Only by a violent fiction 
could James be said to be incapable of governing. 
No doubt he was incapable of governing well ; but 
to admit that when a King ceases, in the opinion of 
his subjects, to govern well, he may be superseded in 
the exercise of his office, would have been to admit 
the doctrine of resistance in its most extreme form — 
a conclusion, it need hardly be said, abhorrent to 
Bancroft and his supporters. They could not long 
have ignored the existence of James, nor continued 
long to recognise a Regent who acted in constant 
defiance of his wishes. One of the bitterest charges 
brought by the Royalists against the Long Parlia- 
ment had been, that it dared to use the name of 
the King to sanction measures of hostility against 
the King. But here were the legitimate successors 
of the Royalists proposing to do the very thing 
which their fathers had abhorred. The arrangement 
would have led to constant quarrels and doubts. It 
would have perpetuated a system of dual govern- 
ment utterly unworkable and intolerable. In fact, 
the elements of the system were just then in 
existence. There was one King at Whitehall and 
another at St. Germains. The supporters of Sancroft 
found this state of things intolerable ; and they 
proposed to get over the dif^culty by making it 
perpetual ! 



MAJ?Y OF ORANGE 37 

A third scheme, far more practical, if less 
attractive, was that of Danby, the astute but 
unscrupulous Minister of Charles II. Danby pro- 
posed to admit the demise of the Crown, and to 
assume that, by strict hereditary right, the title to 
the throne had descended upon Mary, the wife of 
William of Orange, the eldest child of James II. 

There can be little doubt that, if this ingenious 
scheme could have secured acceptance by the nation, 
it would have obviated many of the difficulties 
attaching to the position. The chief cause of 
James's unpopularity was his religion ; but Mary was 
a firm Protestant. James was morose and cruel ; 
but Mary was gay and gentle-hearted, of blameless 
life, beautiful, and thoroughly English. Though as 
yet she had borne no children, she was but twenty- 
six, and, even if her issue failed, her sister Anne was 
the mother of a large family. She was intensely 
popular in Holland ; and there seemed to be no 
reason why she should not be equally popular in 
England. In the reign of Elizabeth England had 
been glorious under the rule of a woman ; and, 
though Mary was married to a man who certainly 
could not be treated as a nonentity, yet William of 
Orange had vast affairs on the Continent to occupy 
his time, and might be kept out of English politics. 
Danby hoped to conciliate the Whigs by his premises, 
and the Tories by his conclusions. He thought 
that the Whigs would be flattered by a recognition 
of the vacancy of the throne, and the Tories by a 
recognition of the claims of hereditary descent. He 
was wrong. In spite of the constitutional orthodoxy 



38 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

of the expression " demise of the Crown," the Tories 
maintained that this demise could only take place 
by the death of the monarch, or, at the very least, 
by his voluntary resignation. The Whigs desired 
something more than a mere change of monarchs. 
Strange to say, both parties agreed to ignore a fact 
which, to the modern historian, seems the most effec- 
tive bar to the success of Danby's scheme, viz., the 
existence of the little Prince of Wales, afterwards 
known as the Old Pretender, whose flight with his 
mother, on the eve of William's entry into London, 
had been one of the most dramatic incidents of 
the crisis. But, as is well known, the absurd mystery 
which had been spun about the event of his birth 
had ended by convincing a people very willing to be 
convinced, that the unfortunate child was no offspring 
of James and his wife, but a deliberate fraud upon 
the nation. The warming-pan theory held the field 
till some months had expired. And, in spite of its 
general unpopularity, Danby's scheme might, in the 
close balance of parties, have turned the scale, but 
for the existence of a simple fact, of a kind not 
infrequently overlooked by the cold calculations of 
politicians, but not infrequently fatal to their most 
crafty schemes — the loyal impulse of a woman's 
heart. It did not occur to Danby, that Mary might 
not be eager to grasp the dazzling prize held out 
to her. 

Fourthly, in sharp contrast with the timid and 
fictitious schemes of Bancroft and Danby, was the 
bold proposal of the Whigs, who declared that 
James, by his conduct, had forfeited the Crown, and 




Photo by\ \}Valker &' Cocker ell. 

THOMAS HOBBES (OF MALMESBURY) (1588-1679). 
Portrait by J. M. Wright, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



40 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

that it devolved on Parliament, as representing the 
nation, to bestow it upon a more worthy wearer. 
Forced to recognise the fact that no formal authority 
for such a proposition could be produced, though 
there was more than one precedent for it in the 
course of English history, the Whigs fell back upon 
a political theory which was then in great vogue. 
This was the famous doctrine of an Original 
Contract, by virtue of which all political society was 
alleged to have arisen out of an agreement, or series 
of agreements, between or amongst rulers and ruled. 
The vagueness of this theory, which, towards the 
middle of the seventeenth century, had almost 
superseded the older theories of the State, may be 
judged of by the fact that, in the hands of the rival 
parties, it led to directly opposite results in practical 
politics. The form adopted by the Tories was that 
rendered famous by Hobbes, who saw in the Original 
Contract a final surrender of all political power into 
the hands of an absolute ruler, by a number of 
individuals who by that act alone became a com- 
munity. It is true that Hobbes admitted that this 
ruler need not be a single individual ; but the 
admission was not of great value for practical 
purposes, for no responsible statesman in 1688 
contended that the sovereign power in England 
was vested in the Houses without the King. And 
Hobbes himself, despite his alleged religious 
unorthodoxy, was universally recognised as the 
champion of Royalism. But the Whigs adopted the 
form of the theory stated by the illustrious Locke, 
who regarded the Original Contract, not so much as 




JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704). 
Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller. 



42 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

an agreement between individual subjects on the one 
hand and the ruler on the other, as an agreement 
between these individuals to form a community, 
which should, from time to time, entrust a ruler for 
their benefit with certain prescribed powers, any 
abuse of which implicitly revoked his authority, and 
justified the community — not necessarily the Houses 
of Parliament — in appointing a successor, and in 
revising the terms of his appointment. Inasmuch 
as the Whigs had been the real instigators of the 
invitation to William, though men of all parties had 
actually signed the invitation, there could be very 
little doubt that their wish was to make William 
King. Inasmuch, also, as the choice of a Regent 
by Bancroft's party, if they were victorious, could 
hardly fall upon any one else, it might seem that the 
only real questions at issue were as to the respective 
claims of William and Mary, and the new conditions, 
if any, to be imposed upon the monarch. And yet 
the decision of these questions, as we shall see, gave 
rise to considerable discussion, and no little difficulty. 
The first definite step towards a settlement was 
the voluntary assembly of about thirty peers at the 
Guildhall of London on December ii, 1688. This 
meeting, though it included the two Archbishops, 
was not by anyYneans representative of the political 
activity of the time ; but the voluntary adhesion 
to it of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen greatly 
strengthened its position, and it must certainly 
receive the credit of making the first attempt at 
reconstruction. It confined itself to voting an 
address to William, expressing its confidence in his 



ASSEMBLY OF PEERS 43 

ability and willingness to serve the nation, and 
praying him to procure the calling of a free Parlia- 
ment. The caution of its leaders was manifest in the 
grounds which it offered for its request, being none 
other than that James himself had approved of and 
actually initiated such a plan.^ But it is not a little 
remarkable, that a close meeting, in which the 
Archbishops must have played such a prominent part, 
should have openly expressed a wish for "a due 
liberty to Protestant Dissenters." 

Encouraged by this address, and by a warm in- 
vitation from the City of London, which immediately 
followed it, William summoned a meeting of about 
sixty peers to St. James's for December 21st, and then, 
having briefly requested them to take steps for the 
settlement of affairs, he withdrew from the room, and 
left them to their own counsels. In spite of this 
ostentatious freedom of discussion, the peers who 
assembled expressed a preference for Westminster as 
a place of debate, and resolved, in fact, to reconstitute 
themselves without delay as the House of Lords. 
Since most of the judges were out of town, they 
named five eminent counsel to act as their advisers 
on constitutional points. 

The move to Westminster being immediately 
followed by the adhesion of thirty more peers, 
William determined to take a further step towards 
the restoration of regular government, by summoning 
all the surviving members of Charles II.'s Parliament, 
together with the aldermen and councillors of 

^ Some of the writs had actually been issued ; but they were recalled 
by James on the eve of his second flight. 



44 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

London, to St. James's, where he invited them 
to advise freely upon the best means to effect a 
speedy settlement. They, following the precedent of 
the peers, likewise resolved to adjourn to Westminster, 
and there constituted themselves a House of Commons 
with a Speaker. Two days later, on Christmas Day, 
the peers resolved to address William, advising him 
to summon a regular Parliament for the 22nd of 
January, and, in the meantime, to act as Adminis- 
trator of Public Affairs ; similar resolutions were 
carried in the assembly of Commons on the following 
day. The Sherlock party made a feeble attempt in 
both Houses to avoid a final breach with James. In 
the Lords, Nottingham actually moved that the King, 
who was still at Rochester, should be addressed to 
issue writs similar to those which, a few days before, 
he had recalled, urging, with pedantic accuracy, that 
no Parliament could be "regular" which was not 
summoned by a King. In the Commons, Sir Robert 
Sawyer ^ could not conceive how it was possible for 
William to act as Administrator without distinguish- 
ing name or title — an objection which was overruled 
by the caustic remark of old Serjeant Maynard, who 
suggested that if the Assembly waited until Sir 
Robert's intelligence had solved that problem, it 
might have to wait long enough. In fact, there was 
an extremely convenient precedent, of recent date, 
for the Convention Parliament which the Houses 



* The objection is sometimes attributed to Sir Robert Southwell, 
initials only being used in the original report. But, as Macaulay 
remarks, the point is far more characteristic of Sawyer, who had been 
a Jacobite Law Officer. 



SECOND CONVENTION PARLIAMENT 45 

proposed to create, in the similar assembly which had 
recalled Charles IL, and carried out the Restoration. 
It would have been awkward for the Tories to admit 
any doubts of the legality of a body which had 
effected such a glorious achievement, and difficult to 
argue that a Convention which assembled at the call 
of William was less powerful than one which had 
assembled at the call of Monk. Accordingly, it was 
resolved that the regular machinery should be 
restored as soon as possible, even though irregular 
means were used to restore it. And so Letters 
Missive of William took the place of the regular 
royal writs ; and it is worthy of notice that these, 
instead of being sent to the sheriffs, as was usual, 
were directed to the coroners of the counties and the 
chief magistrates of the boroughs.^ The elections 
took place without disturbance ; and, on January 22, 
1689, the Convention Parliament met to essay its 
task of settlement. 

The very first step taken by each House was 
sugforestive of the ultimate issue of its debates. The 
Lords chose, as temporary Speaker, the Marquis of 
Halifax, who, though his well-known nickname of 
" Trimmer " seemed to negative any decided attitude 
on the great question of the day, was generally 
suspected of Whig leanings. His unsuccessful 
opponent was Danby, the author of the proposal to 
seat Mary on the throne by hereditary right. In the 
Commons Henry Powle, or Powell, a well-known 
Whig, was chosen in opposition to Sir Edward 

^ The sheriffs had, of course, been appointed by James ; the coroners 
and chief magistrates of boroughs were mostly elective officials. 



46 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

Seymour, the great Tory squire of the west country, 
in spite of the fact that Seymour had openly 
welcomed William on his progress to London. ^ 

But, whatever acute observers may have augured 
of the final event, it soon became clear that, at any 
rate in the Lords' House, the Tories were not going 
to give way without a struggle. The first business 
was to provide for the temporary continuance of the 
administration ; and both Houses agreed in request- 
ing William to continue the task which he had so 
satisfactorily begun. Both Houses seem also to have 
agreed (for reasons which are not altogether clear) 
that the actual business of deliberation could not be 
immediately commenced. But, when the Commons 
appointed the 28th of January for going into Com- 
mittee on the State of the Nation, a determined 
effort was made by the Regency party, headed by 
Nottingham, Clarendon, and Rochester, to bring on 
the debate in the Lords on the 25th, and thus to 
secure the advantage of priority for the plan which 
they hoped to be able to carry. This scheme was, 
however, frustrated by a combination of Danby and 
Halifax, who secured the postponement of the Lords' 
debate until the 29th. What precisely were Danby 's 
hopes in joining in this manoeuvre, it is difficult to 
say. But the step, formal as it may appear, was 
really of vital importance ; for it practically left the 
initiative to the Commons' House. 

' It is of this occasion that a well-known story is related. William, 
intending to be very gracious to Seymour, said, " I think, Sir Edward, 
you are of the Duke of Somerset's family." " Pardon me, Sir," 
replied Sir Edward, " the Duke of Somerset is of my family." 



THE TWO RESOLUTIONS 47 

When the 28th arrived, it was clear that the Whig 
sentiment was in great preponderance amongst the 
elected representatives of the people. While there 
was manifested a strong dislike to any expression 
which could be construed into an admission that 
James had been deprived of, or forcibly driven from 
the throne, there was an overwhelming feeling in 
favour of taking advantage of the situation which 
James had himself created by his flight. A feeble plea 
for a Regency put forward by Heneage Finch, and a 
suggestion by Lord Fanshaw of a further adjourn- 
ment, were fiercely overruled, and, after a few hours' 
debate, a form of words, illogical in itself, but accept- 
able from its very want of logic and clearness, was 
devised to meet objections of detail. It was resolved, 
apparently without a division, " that King James the 
Second, having endeavoured to subvert the Con- 
stitution of the Kingdom', by breaking the Original 
Contract between King and people, and, by the 
advice of Jesuits, and other wicked persons, having 
violated the fundamental Laws, and having withdrawn 
himself out of this Kingdom, has abdicated the 
government, and that the Throne is thereby become 
vacant." On the following day, the House also 
voted, nein, con., "that it hath been found, by ex- 
perience, to be inconsistent with the safety and 
welfare of this Protestant Kingdom, to be governed 
by a Popish prince," and further, in view of the 
necessary consequences of these two votes, appointed 
a committee, though not without opposition, to 
propose such guarantees as should be necessary to 
secure the laws and liberties of the nation. 



48 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

Meanwhile, the first resolution had reached the 
House of Lords, where it was the subject of 
acrimonious debate. A powerful speech by Notting- 
ham, in favour of the Regency plan, was opposed by 
the combined forces of Halifax and Danby ; but 
Nottingham's motion, in spite of the significant 
absence of Bancroft, was only defeated by two votes, 
all the Bishops present, with the exception of London 
and Bristol, voting in its favour. An equally stub- 
born debate upon the apparently academic, but 
really very practical question of the Original Contract, 
resulted in a second defeat of the Nottingham party 
by seven votes. But all the persuasion of Halifax 
and Danby could not bring the House to agree with 
the Commons in declaring the throne vacant ; and 
the majority also insisted on denying that James had 
" abdicated," though they were willing to admit that 
he had " deserted " the throne. The fact that this 
vote was put on the 30th of January, the sacred 
anniversary of Royalists, may have had something 
to do with deciding waverers. 

The following day was observed, by agreement of 
both Houses, as a day of Thanksgiving for the 
deliverance wrought by William for the nation. On 
the 1st of February occurred an incident which at 
that time, in almost any country but England, would 
have been the signal for violence, viz., a tumultuous 
and disorderly petition, in favour of a speedy settle- 
ment, by the citizens of London. Then appeared 
the wisdom of the apparently formal delegation to 
William of the conduct of affairs during the crisis. 
William, acting under this mandate, directed the 



THE FREE CONFERENCE 49 

Lord Mayor to issue his precept to the municipal 
authorities to maintain order at their peril; and the 
direction was promptly obeyed. The incident did 
not in the least interrupt the deliberate conduct of 
the Houses, the Commons, on the following day, 
resolving to support with formal reasons their refusal 
of the Lords' amendments. 

The two Conferences between the Houses which 
followed this resolution are, despite the apparent 
technicality and tediousness of the debate, well worth 
a study, though it would be impossible, in the space 
at our disposal, to trace their history in detail. The 
Lords having, at the first or formal meeting, 
adhered to their resolutions, and the Commons 
having, by the decisive but not overwhelming 
majority of 131, decided not to accept the Lords' 
amendments, it was resolved, on the 5th of February, 
to enter upon a Free Conference, or open discussion, 
between the two Houses, through the agency of a 
deputation appointed from each. The list of managers 
for the Commons included the names of Maynard 
and Holt, two of the greatest lawyers of the day ; 
of Sir Thomas Littleton and Mr. Sacheverel, whose 
reputation as debaters long survived in the House ; 
of Hampden, grandson of the great Puritan leader, 
and equally daring in the cause of freedom, but less 
cool and judicious than his noble grandfather ; 
above all, of Somers, the rising hope of the Whig 
party, then at the very outset of his great career, 
but already admired and trusted. For the Lords, 
the labouring oar was pulled by Nottingham, 
Clarendon, and Rochester, all of them, it will be 

5 



50 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

remembered, identified with the proposal for a 
Regency, Danby and HaHfax remaining judiciously 
in the background. 

It soon appeared that the acrimonious discussion 
on the use of the word " abdicate " was merely a 
screen for an uneasy doubt which had been roused in 
the minds of the Tories by the wording of the last 
resolution of the Commons. When the latter urged 
that the throne was vacant, did they mean to imply 
that the Crown of England was elective ? This fatal 
suspicion, happily for the peace of the nation, 
leaked out at a comparatively early stage, through 
the proposal of Nottingham to amend the resolution 
by declaring the throne vacant only " as to King 
James." The fiery Sacheverel met the proposal 
with an emphatic negative ; but Somers, eagerly 
grasping at the chance of a settlement, hinted, in a 
very judicious speech, that the Commons were in no 
way anxious to push consequences to an extreme, 
and would be quite content to solve a practical 
problem. The opening thus happily made was 
rapidly extended. In spite of a fierce protest from 
Clarendon, in spite of the more dangerous unwilling- 
ness of the extreme Whigs to give up their claims, 
Somers held on his course for a compromise ; and 
at length Nottingham wound up the case for the 
Lords with a very broad hint that a basis of settle- 
ment had been reached. 

It must not be supposed, however, that the 
Regency party had been convinced solely b}' the 
acuteness of Holt and the judicious temper of Somers. 
While the dispute between the two Houses had been 



I 



REGENCY SCHEME FAILS 5 I 

going on, two external facts of the greatest import- 
ance had occurred. Danby, full of confidence that 
his plan, for proclaiming Mary Queen by hereditary 
right, would not fail to commend itself to the person 
most concerned, sent over to Holland to assure her 
of his extreme devotion to what he conceived to be 
her interests. He was staggered to receive in reply 
a sharp and dignified rebuke, in which he was 
informed by Mary, that nothing could be more 
distasteful to her than a plan which would place her 
in a position of rivalry with her husband, and, in 
fact, ordered to cease meddling with matters which 
he did not understand. To the author of the Treaty 
of Dover, such a letter meant one of two things — 
either that the writer was an idiot, or that she had 
some deep-laid scheme which his efforts threatened 
to cross. But, whilst he was hesitating whether to 
regard Mary with contempt or admiration, Danby 
learnt that his letter, together with a copy of Mary's 
reply, had been put into William's hands, and he 
saw that his scheme was at an end. 

It was now time to dispose of the Regency plan. 
To this end William himself summoned a few 
leading politicians to his presence, and delivered 
his sentiments. His attitude was thoroughly correct. 
He did not in the least dispute the right of the 
Houses to adopt any plan which seemed to them 
best for the settlement of the nation. If they 
thought a Regency best, he had no wish to oppose 
their view. But he thought it might save time if he 
made it quite clear that he would not act as Regent, 
either for James or for Mary. Danby, who was present 



52 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

at the meeting, must have looked exquisitely foolish. 
Having no morals and very little dignity of his own, 
he had assumed, as fundamental axioms, that Mary 
would eagerly grasp the Crown, and that William 
would be only too glad to get anything in the way 
of power. Though William made no change in his 
courtesy of demeanour towards him, he must have 
known that his duplicity was open to the King's 
eyes, that the evidence of it was possibly at that 
moment in the King's pocket. He must have felt 
that the game was up. Every one knew that the 
departure of William from England must be followed 
by anarchy, probably by bloodshed. It was quite 
clear that there was nothing to be done but to 
proclaim William King, and to get over the legal 
difficulty with as much decency as possible. Halifax, 
indeed, declared openly for making William sole 
monarch ; but Mary's honest friends were so 
indignant at this proposal that Halifax gave way, 
and it was agreed that William and Mary should 
be joint rulers, William being entrusted with the 
actual administration during his life. In the event 
of Mary having no children, the Princess Anne and 
her heirs were to succeed on the death of the 
survivor. If William survived Mary, and had issue 
by another wife, they were to be entitled after the 
failure of Anne's issue. 

Only one thing more remained to be done to 
effect a settlement ; but this one thing threatened to 
take time. It will be remembered that the Commons 
had, on the 29th of January, appointed a committee 
to draw up proposals for an alteration of the con- 



CONSTITUTIONAL REFORMS 53 

stitution, with a view to the better security of 
popular Hberties and the Protestant religion in the 
future. On the 2nd of February the committee had 
reported twenty-three Resolutions, to which the 
House added five on its own account. It was 
desired, (i) to declare illegal the exercise of the 
royal claim to suspend or dispense with the execu- 
tion of statutes, (2) the existence of the Court of 
High Commission and others like it, (3) the attempt 
to levy money without the consent of Parliament, 
(4) the commitment of people to prison for petition- 
ing the Crown, and (5) the raising or keeping of 
a standing army within the kingdom, in time of 
peace, without the consent of Parliament ; (6) to 
sanction the keeping of arms by Protestants for 
their own defence ; (7) to guarantee the freedom of 
elections and the security of Parliamentary privileges; 

(8) to provide for the frequent holding of Parliaments ; 

(9) to prohibit the requirement of excessive bail, and 
the imposition of excessive fines and illegal 
punishments ; (10) to reform the abuses of the jury 
system ; (11) to declare void all grants of fines and 
forfeitures before conviction ; (12) to prohibit 
marriage with a Papist by any member of the royal 
family ; (13) to compel every occupant of the throne 
on his accession to take an oath to uphold the 
Protestant religion, and to reform the Coronation 
Oath; (14) to declare the Acts concerning the 
Militia grievous to the subject; (15) to secure a 
sitting Parliament against interruption while business 
remained to be done ; (16) to shorten the duration 
of Parliaments; (17) to declare a royal pardon no 



54 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

defence to an impeachment in Parliament; (i8) to 
protect Corporations against the abuse of Quo 
Wan^anto proceedings; (19) to secure Hberty of 
Protestant worship and the uniting of Protestants 
for public worship, " so far as may be " ; (20) to 
modify the construction of Treason statutes, and 
reform trials for treasons ; (21) to give judges 
security of tenure and salary ; (22) to reform abuses 
in the appointment of sheriffs and the exercise of 
their office ; (23) to abolish prosecutions by way of 
information ; (24) to regulate Courts of Justice and 
the fees of office ; (25) to provide against the buying 
and selling of public offices ; (26) to permit the 
returns made to writs of Habeas Corpus and 
Mandamus to be traversed ; (27) to reform abuses 
in the collection of the Hearth Tax and Excise. 

This programme was evidently too comprehensive 
to be carried out in full before the settlement of the 
actual crisis. But it is surprising to notice how 
much of it was achieved within a short time. The 
first eleven items were immediately embodied in the 
Declaration of Right, on the acceptance of which 
William and Mary became, on the 13th of February, 
King and Queen of England ; and these, with the 
addition of the 12th and 13th, were incorporated into 
the Bill of Rights passed in full legal form during 
the next session. Even before that date, other 
statutes had provided a new Coronation Oath, 
secured a limited amount of toleration for Protestant 
Dissenters, and abolished the hated Hearth Money. 
In 1694 the Triennial Act limited the duration of 
Parliament to three years. In 1695 a noble statute 



REVOLUTION POLICY 55 

reformed the abuses of trials for treason. The Act 
of Settlement in 1700 provided that no pardon 
should be pleadable to an impeachment, and gave 
the judges security of tenure. Although criminal 
Informations have not been abolished, a statute of the 
year 1692 destroyed their most objectionable feature, 
by compelling informers to give security for costs, 
and allowing expenses to successful defendants. The 
abuses of sheriff- process were reformed in 17 16. 
Although no great change in the Militia system was 
effected until 1757, it is probable that the grievances 
of which the Committee complained in 1689 soon 
disappeared, as the Militia itself soon sank into 
decay. On the other hand, the demand for fixed 
sessions of Parliament died away, as it gradually 
became manifest that a dissolution might be the 
most popular of measures ; and the demand for 
security of Corporations was gradually replaced by a 
movement for their reform. Unhappily, the sale of 
public offices, though already illegal continued to 
flourish with the consent of all parties, until the 
sweeping reforms associated with the great name of 
Burke rendered it no longer profitable, and the 
abuses of the Excise system fell beneath the same 
vigorous hand. But it is no small testimony to the 
sagacity of the men of the Revolution, that only in 
the matter of dissolution of Parliament has posterity 

^ It had been prohibited by statute in 1388, and again in 1552. In 
1809 the prohibition was once more renewed, at last with efifect. 
In the early part of the seventeenth century even the saintly Colonel 
Hutchinson treated the purchase of an office as an ordinary investment 
of money. [Life, p. 67. ) 



56 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

made any change in their poHcy ; and it is doubtful 
whether anything short of a crisis such as that of 
171 5 could have justified the passing of the 
Septennial Act. 

The really striking feature of the Revolution is, 
however, to be found, not in its details, important 
as these were, but in its general character. However 
much the defenders of hereditary right and non- 
resistance might disguise the fact from themselves, 
however willing their opponents might be to con- 
ciliate their feelings, no man could fail to see that 
those principles had been definitely defeated. The 
Revolution affirmed, in the most practical way, 
that disobedience to the law on the part of a 
monarch entailed forfeiture of the Crown, and that 
to the nation only did it belong to bestow that 
Crown elsewhere, and on new conditions. No doubt 
the nation, unwilling to shock long-established 
traditions, had sought for a successor to James 
among his near relations. It would have been 
criminal folly to do otherwise. But no doubt either 
can there be that, if Mary and Anne had professed 
the religion of their father, they also would have 
been passed over, and a champion sought else- 
where. It may be said that this fact involved no 
new principle, that Richard II. and Henry VI. had' 
been deposed for incompetency, and Charles I. for 
treachery. But these changes had been effected by 
a violence which, in Charles's case at least, had 
brought swift reaction. Not a drop of English 
blood had been shed during the momentous events 
of 1688-9. Without violence or bloodshed, with a 



A LIMITED MONARCHY 57 

deliberation and a formality which, if they were not 
technically legal, had at least all the appearance, 
and much of the reality, of law, the nation had 
solemnly asserted the doctrine that kings, like other 
persons, must be held responsible for their actions. 
It is this which entitles the Revolution to its proud 
epithet of " glorious." 

It is, however, necessary, in estimating the 
character of the Revolution, to bear one caution 
constantly in mind. The monarchy which it 
established was " limited " in the strictest sense of 
the term ; for it was a monarchy in which the Crown 
was bound by strictly legal limitations. The settle- 
ment of 1689 even went so far as to contemplate an 
actual refusal of allegiance, in the event of a breach 
by the monarch of its fundamental conditions. It 
was solemnly provided, by the Bill of Rights, that a 
profession of Romanism, or even marriage with a 
Papist, should ipso facto disqualify for occupancy of 
the throne ; and the provision remains part of our 
statute law, though it is difficult to see how it could 
be enforced by legal methods. But of the modern 
conception of the monarch as the mouthpiece of the 
nation, expressing its will through Parliament and the 
Cabinet, the Bill of Rights gives no hint. There is no 
allusion in it, even the most distant, to that doctrine 
of Ministerial responsibility which we now regard as of 
the essence of English politics. Doubtless Halifax and 
Somers, and perhaps even Danby, expected to wield 
a good deal of power, under a master who was neces- 
sarily ignorant of English affairs. But in their wildest 
dreams they probably never aspired to a tithe of the 



58 THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION 

power exercised, as of course, by the Cabinet Minister 
of to-day. In one sense, no doubt, William of Orange 
was well fitted by experience to occupy the position 
of a British monarch of the nineteenth century. 
He had for some years been the first magistrate of 
a confederate republic, in which not merely every 
state, but almost every city, claimed an independence 
which we should now consider fatal to security and 
vigour in administration. But it may very well be 
doubted whether his experience in that capacity had 
at all disposed him to play a still humbler part, in 
a country for which he felt little affection, and which 
had for him little enthusiasm. His whole attitude 
during the crisis had negatived such an idea. Whilst 
professing perfect resignation to the decision of the 
Houses, he had plainly intimated that, if he stayed, 
he stayed as a master and not as a servant. That 
the Revolution of 1688-9 contained in itself the 
germs of a yet profounder Revolution, no one at the 
time appears to have seen. 



I 




Ill 



THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 



It is hardly wonderful that the ship of State sailed 
uneasily in the years which followed the crowning of 
William and Mary. The obvious dangers which 
threatened her were great ; the unseen dangers were 
greater still 

No one, of course, could for a moment suppose 
that James would accept his defeat with submission. 
A few miles from the shores of England lay the 
dominions of a Prince, by far the most powerful in 
Europe, closely allied by blood and faith with the 
exiled King; a Prince, moreover, who was notoriously 
ready to champion the cause of the oppressed, even 
when there was nothing but glory to be gained by 
the cause. To Louis XIV. the fall of James was 
a golden opportunity for personal aggrandisement. 
The steady expansion of France during the previous 
thirty years, the intense Royalist reaction after the 
troubles of the Fronde, the concentrated efforts in 
various spheres of activity put forward by a series of 
great French statesmen and warriors — Richelieu, 



6o THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

Mazarin, Colbert, Enghien (Conde), Turenne, Vau- 
ban, Louvois — had raised France to the proud 
position of pre-eminence so recently vacated by 
Spain ; and the rulers of less successful States were 
becoming anxious for the security of their dominions. 
The power of France was all the more dangerous 
that it was entirely concentrated in the hands of a 
single man, and that man the King ; while the 
direction which French policy was likely to take had 
been significantly pointed out by the revocation, in 
1685, of the Edict of Nantes. The great obstacle to 
the success of that policy was no other than William 
himself, the new King of England, the soul of the 
Protestant league, who had consecrated his life to the 
task of opposing the ambition of France ; for he well 
knew that to that ambition his beloved native land was 
destined to fall the next victim. It is probable that, 
if there was one man in Europe whom Louis dreaded, 
and one man whom more than all others he hated, it 
was William of Orange. We may easily understand, 
then, how gladly he welcomed the exiled Stuart, how 
warmly he espoused his cause, which was the cause of 
Catholicism, Divine Right, and Kingship, against that 
of Protestantism, rebellion, and unconcealed rivalry. 
To William and to Louis alike, it may shrewdly 
be guessed, the Revolution in England was but a 
move — important (no doubt), but only a move — in the 
great game which they were playing. To William 
it meant an ally of unknown strength : for England 
had almost ceased, since Cromwell's death, to count 
in European politics. To Louis it meant a priceless 
weapon in his diplomatic armoury. 



FRANCE AND IRELAND 6 1 

The first fruits of Louis' friendship for James were, 
of course, the descent on Ireland. In that country 
there were, alas ! the familiar causes of unrest, 
perhaps in more than usual intensity. The terrible 
measures of Cromwell had left abiding memories of 
bitter hostility to the Protestant cause. The corrupt 
and muddled policy of the Restoration had but added 
fuel to the discontent ; for it had been found im- 
possible to dispossess the Cromwellian settlers, and 
the wretched country had been again pillaged for the 
benefit of the returned Royalists. The rigid policy 
of Anglican orthodoxy had set the seal even more 
firmly than before on the Protestant ascendency. 
The commercial and agricultural prosperity of the 
country had been stifled by the miserable policy 
which, in travesty of the provisions of the Navigation 
Act, had first forbidden the importation into England 
of Irish cattle and other produce, and finally excluded 
Ireland from the benefit of the colonial trade. It is 
hardly wonderful, therefore, that there was little 
sympathy in Ireland with the statesmen who had 
effected the Revolution, while there was much sym- 
pathy with James, as a Catholic who had suffered 
for his faith. Moreover, the troubles of the last forty 
years had driven many Irishmen into the service of 
Louis, James's ally, who was only too glad of such 
valuable material for his great armies. Consequently, 
the Irish Catholics were little likely to object to 
James, on the ground that he was supported by 
French soldiers. 

It is no part of the purpose of this book to tell the 
story of the Irish campaign. In spite of the heroic 



62 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

resistance of the Ulster Protestants, affairs went 
badly for the English interests, until William himself 
took the field. The evil traditions of Charles II.'s 
reign had made the army organisation a mass of cor- 
ruption and inefficiency. James declared openly for a 
complete Irish policy. Even the Restoration settle- 
ment was to be revised : and the hatreds of long 
years were gratified by a sweeping Act of Attainder. 
But the landing of William in the summer of 1690 
changed the face of affairs. The brilliant victory of 
the Boyne once more shattered the hopes of James, 
who fled from what had once been his kingdom, 
never to return. The stubborn resistance of isolated 
strongholds terminated with the fall of Limerick in 
the following year ; and, in 1692, the complete victory 
of Russell over the French fleet off La Hogue wiped 
out the disgrace of the defeat at Beachy Head, and 
for the time dispersed all fears of a French invasion. 

Whether this rapid relief from its most anxious 
fears was in truth the best thing for the nation may, 
however, be a grave question. So long as the 
country was actually threatened by a hostile force, 
statesmen of all parties were, in a manner, bound to 
stand by one another and the new King. Even 
those who, in their hearts, hankered after the return 
of James, could hardly have wished to see him 
return at the head of a victorious invading army. 
And it was certain that nothing else would cause 
William to jaeld. Indifferent to his new acquisition 
as he (somewhat too openly, it may be thought) 
professed himself to be, he had the soldier's instinct 
strong in him. But, with the rolling away of that 




Photo by\ \_Walker &= Cocker ell. 

WILLIAM III. (1650-1702). 

Portrait by Jan Wyck, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



64 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

danger from without, came others, much more subtle 
and dangerous, from within. 

Nor is it difficult to see why these dangers arose. 
For, all unknown to themselves, the men of the 
Revolution had destroyed, at least for a time, an 
impalpable but important factor in the working of 
English politics. William of Orange was incom- 
parably the ablest ruler who had worn the Crown of 
England since the death of Elizabeth. He was, more- 
over, in spite of his somewhat repellent manners, a 
thoroughly upright. God-fearing, and even kind- 
hearted man. If his domestic morals were not so 
free from reproach as those of Charles I., they certainly 
had nothing to fear from a comparison with those of 
James I. and his two grandsons ; and as certainly 
few of the English nobility of his day could afford to 
point the finger of scorn at him on that account. 
His personal bravery none could dispute. The 
blood royal of England ran in his veins ; while his 
wife, who shared his throne, was. actually the 
daughter of the deposed King. And yet, in spite 
of all this, he failed to win that feeling of personal 
loyalty which, as England was governed then, was 
essential to the smooth working of government. It 
may seem almost monstrous, that the men who 
would have accepted as unquestioned gospel the 
silliest remark of James I., or the most extravagant 
pretensions of his son, should have cavilled at the 
reasonable wishes of William ; but such undoubtedly 
was the fact. For good or for evil, the mystery of 
romance which for centuries had hung around the 
throne, and sanctified the person of the monarch, was 



CHOICE OF MINISTERS 6$ 

gone ; and with it one of the most powerful agencies 
of government. It is idle to point out, that the 
theory of Divine Right, which supported James and 
opposed William, implied a divine sanction, not 
merely for the rights of a particular family, but for 
the feudal rules of descent which vested the rights of 
that family in a particular person. Such arguments 
of logic are powerless against the elusive working of 
the imagination ; and imagination, as every practical 
statesman knows, is one of the most powerful factors 
in politics, if not the most powerful. The Restora- 
tion which seated Charles II. on the throne had been 
enormously popular, because it had appealed to the 
national imagination ; the Revolution aroused little 
enthusiasm, because it appealed only to the national 
reason. 

This is really the key to the domestic troubles 
which broke out immediately after the coronation of 
William and Mary, and lasted, with little intermission, 
until William was laid in his grave. The King, 
though his heart was, doubtless, in his great foreign 
schemes, set out with an earnest desire to do his 
duty by his new subjects. His first Ministers were 
chosen with rigid impartiality from all possible 
shades of political opinion. Nottingham's open 
advocacy of the Regency scheme did not bar his 
way to office ; he was made Secretary of State, with 
Shrewsbury, one of the most distinguished of the 
young nobility, as his colleague. Danby's bad record 
did not prevent him obtaining that recognition of 
his political importance to which his representative 
position entitled him. He was made President of 

6 



66 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDE^ 

the Council. To Halifax William owed, perhaps 
more than to any other man, his triumphant position; 
but Halifax had to be content with the minor office 
of Privy Seal. The great office of Chancellor was 
refused both by Nottingham and by Halifax, who had 
the sense to admit that their professional knowledge 
was not equal to the task. It was accordingly put 
into Commission ; and three lawyers of eminence 
(the first of them Serjeant Maynard) were appointed 
to execute it. A similar course was followed with the 
Treasury and the Admiralty ; but the commissioner- 
ships were exclusively filled by well-known English- 
men. Even the places in the Household, with one 
single exception, were given to Englishmen, though 
William might well have claimed that his domestic 
officials should be his own countrymen. In the 
Privy Council Bentinck was the only foreigner who 
obtained a place. In the appointment of judges? 
William went far beyond anything that an English 
monarch had previously yielded to popular feeling, 
by placing the selection entirely in the hands of the 
Privy Council ; and the honourable example which 
he set had the happiest consequences. None of the 
misdeeds of the Stuarts had been more fatal to the 
cause of liberty than their treatment of the law courts. 
From the accession of William and Mary dates the 
proud and almost unbroken record of integrity and 
dignity on the English judicial bench. Finally, the 
abilities and the character of Somers secured for him, 
in spite of his youth, the important office of Solicitor- 
General. 

The King's treatment of his enemies was as lenient 



I 



LENIENCY OF WILLIAM 6/ 

as his choice of Ministers was constitutional. Several 
of the Bishops, and many of the clergy, refused to 
take the oath of allegiance, even though that oath 
had been recast in such a way as to make the 
smallest possible demand upon tender consciences. 
It will hardly be contended that it was beyond the 
right of Parliament to prescribe such an oath to men 
in the position of the Bishops, who, as peers of 
Parliament, were personally called upon to take part 
in the councils of the State. Yet there is some 
evidence that William offered to use his influence to 
induce Parliament to dispense even with the oath, in 
the case of prelates who were willing to exercise their 
public spiritual functions in a peaceful way. Even 
when this generous offer was rejected, the King 
steadily maintained an attitude of forbearance, and 
sternly refused to allow the extremer Whigs to resort 
to drastic measures. He could not, in the face of 
the recent Act of Parliament, treat the non-juring 
prelates as bishops ; but for two years he allowed 
them to remain in their palaces, and declined to fill 
their vacant sees. It is more than probable that, but 
for the express words of the statute, he would have 
allowed the non-juring parish clergy to retain their 
livings, in spite of the fact that the policy of exact- 
ing the oaths of allegiance as a condition of holding 
ecclesiastical office was at least eighty years old. 
No personal proceedings were taken against the 
ejected clergy, even though many of them were 
strongly suspected of corresponding with James, and 
though they certainly consorted with notorious 
Jacobites. Nor was William's lenity confined to 



6S THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

the clergy. He had not been a year on the throne, 
when treason of the most unquestionable kind was 
brought home to Clarendon, Dartmouth, Preston, 
the Bishop of Ely (Turner), Ashton, and Elliott. 
Preston and Ashton, who were taken in the very act 
of carrying treasonable despatches to France, were, 
after trials of scrupulous fairness, condemned to 
death ; and Ashton was executed. Preston turned 
King's evidence, and may, therefore, be said to have 
bought his life rather than owed it to William's for- 
giveness. But Clarendon was pardoned, Dartmouth 
would, probably, have received the same indulgence 
if he had not died in prison. Turner was allowed 
to escape before apprehension, Elliott was never 
brought to trial. No general proscription was set on 
foot, though the plot was known to be of wide 
extent ; and, from first to last, m spite of the 
grossest provocation, William never allowed himself 
to be betrayed into vindictiveness against his 
enemies. 

But no sense of gratitude or shame restrained the 
quarrels and turbulence of Ministers, Parliament, or 
clergy. The vivid pages of Macaulay reproduce for 
us some of the choicest examples of clerical 
indecency which his unrivalled knowledge of the 
literature of the time discovered. The insults heaped 
on William's new Primate, Tillotson, a man of pure, 
almost saintly life, were so gross, that they speedily 
drove the Archbishop into his grave. The non-juring 
Primate, Bancroft, behaved with the peevishness of 
a spoilt child ; and did his best to render the work 
of the Church impossible. The smaller members of 



TURBULENCE OF OFFICIALS 69 

the faction lost no opportunity of heaping insuh upon 
their indulgent monarch. Some even travestied .the 
sacred offices of the Church in their desire to gratify 
their spleen. The most odious feature of this 
conduct was the fact that it was often shared by men 
who had not sufficient courage to refuse the oaths, 
and who were thus guilty of a double perjury. For 
the four hundred resolute Jacobites who gave up 
their livings at the call of what they believed to be 
their duty, we can have but respect, even though 
we may deem them mistaken. But for the cowards 
whose consciences merely impelled them to plot 
against and slander the King whose sworn subjects 
they were, there can be nothing but contempt. 

The officials of the State were no whit behind the 
officials of the Church. Danby, though he seems to 
have been faithful to the Revolution settlement, 
stained the high office which he held by the grossest 
and most shameless corruption. Nottingham and 
Shrewsbury, the two Secretaries of State, made 
William's life a burden to him by their constant 
quarrels ; and Shrewsbury, in mere pique at what he 
believed to be disregard of his advice, allowed him- 
self, whilst actually holding the seals of office, to be 
drawn into a treasonable correspondence with James. 
Mordaunt and Delamere, Whigs as they both were, 
could not work together at the Treasury Board, 
except when they were attacking Godolphin ; and 
Godolphin, though he was entrusted with the most 
vital secrets of State, was justly suspected of treason. 
Marlborough, who was loaded with honour by 
William, not only did his best to create an irrecon- 



JO THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

cilable feud between the King and the Princess Anne, 
the next heir to the throne, but actually betrayed 
military secrets to James. Russell, the responsible 
head of the naval administration, not content with 
the immense emoluments of his office, and the lavish 
bounty which had bestowed on him a pension of 
;^3,ooo a year, long hesitated on the brink of treason ; 
and, when he finally decided against the risk, solaced 
his impeccable virtue with a series of fractious 
complaints and quarrels, which did much to destroy 
the results of the splendid victory of La Hogue. 

But surely, if the clergy were insolent and Ministers 
unfaithful, William might expect support and con- 
fidence from that Parliament which had bestowed 
upon him the Crown, and whose care for the 
liberty of the subject he had honestly and cheer- 
fully recognised ? Unhappily, neither Peers nor 
Commons seem to have had an}^ appreciation of the 
gravity of the situation. The Whigs were bent on 
persecuting the Tories ; the Tories were bent on 
denouncing the Whigs. It proved actually im- 
possible to turn the Declaration of Right into a 
statute during the. first session of the Convention. 
Godolphin moved to insert a new clause reserving 
the hereditary rights of the Protestant members of 
James's family ; and, when the Commons refused to 
agree, the Lords maintained the proposal, and the 
Bill was lost for the session. Thus the very funda- 
mentals of the Revolution were imperilled. Although, 
in the first fervour of their gratitude, the Commons 
voted supplies for a war against France, they refused 
to pass the Abjuration Bill and the Bill for a General 




Photo by\ 



YWalker &" Cockerell. 



THE GREAT DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH (1650-I722). 
Portrait by Closterman, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



72 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

Pardon, in spite of continual reminders by the King 
of the urgent necessity for the healing of old sores. 
They were perhaps right, though their motives were 
suspicious, in refusing to accord a formal sanction 
to the new practice of publishing the Votes of the 
House ; but they were clearly wrong in quarrelling 
with the law courts for venturing to question the 
validity of their orders in matters affecting the liberty 
of the subject, and they were fractiously unreasonable 
in compelling William to allow inspection of the 
records of the Privy Council. At the beginning of 
the year 1690 William, in despair, dissolved the 
Houses ; but the step only added to the dangers of 
the time. For the new House of Commons, which 
met on March 20th, contained a strong Tory 
majority ; and it became an open question whether 
the Revolution settlement could stand. 

In his despair, the King determined on two steps. 
One of them will seem to us the most natural in the 
world, and, perhaps, was not very distasteful to 
William ; the other can only be justified by extreme 
public danger, and William loathed it from his 
soul. 

When it became clear that the new Parliament 
would be strongly Tory, the King determined to 
conciliate it by getting rid of his Whig Ministers. 
Halifax retired, probably at his own wish ; and 
Danby, a strong Tory, became the most powerful 
official of the State. Mordaunt and Delamere were 
ejected from the Treasury ; and Sir John Lowther, 
a great Tory squire, became First Lord, and osten- 
sible representative of the Court in the House of 



POWER OF THE COMMONS 73 

Commons. For some reason, never decisively ex- 
plained, Godolphin, Tory as he was, also quitted the 
Treasury ; but the Whig Torrington was replaced as 
First Commissioner of the Admiralty by the Tory 
Pembroke, and Wharton and Sacheverel resigned 
from the Board. It has been hinted that, in making 
these changes, William did no particular violence to his 
feelings. Though he may be said to have owed his 
Crown to the Whigs, though he was constantly loyal 
to Revolution principles, he was, in all probability, no 
more of a Whig than any other ruler of his day ; and 
he probably preferred the Tory creed, if he could win 
the friendship of those who professed it. There lay 
the rub. Could William secure the loyalty of the 
Tories, merely by giving office to their leaders ? 

Apparently, William thought not. For there was 
grave doubt whether the rank and file of the party 
would swallow the change of policy, whether they 
would not rather take the opportunity of their 
victory at the polls to act according to their genuine 
feelings. It could not escape a man of William's 
penetration that, in the House of Commons 
especially, there lay a grave danger of revolt. The 
House had been gradually learning its strength. It 
could not but feel that it had made the Revolution, 
that its conduct iri the last few months had put the 
King to the extreme hazard of a dissolution, that in 
the power of the purse it held a terrible weapon over 
the head of a ruler to whom his Crown was valuable 
chiefly because it promised him the chance of 
carrying out his great Continental schemes, the first 
necessity of which was a liberal supply of funds. 



74 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

With a hostile House of Commons, the dream of 
WilHam's Hfe must have for ever remained 
unfulfilled. 

And so the King resolved to obtain by corruption 
what he could not hope to win by honest persuasion. 
In Danby, now, as has been said, his chief Minister, 
he found a tool ready to his hand. The man who had 
acted as go-between in the scandalous treaty of 1678, 
by which Charles II. had sold his country and his 
allies to the French, who had accumulated in a few 
years of office a fortune sufficient for the support of a 
dukedom,^ was not likely to scruple at the purchase 
of votes in the House of Commons. But it was 
necessary that the delicate negotiations of the 
bribery market should be actually carried out by an 
agent in the House itself; and Danby was, of course, 
a peer. He selected as his mouthpiece for the 
purpose one of those unscrupulous men of whom a 
few have in every age disgraced the honourable 
profession of the law. Sir John Trevor, member for 
Yarmouth (Hants) in the new Parliament, had owed 
his start in life to the kindness of a relation, who had 
a respectable practice at the bar, and who allowed 
his needy kinsman the run of his chambers. Such 
an opening was all that was required by the acute 
and unscrupulous youth. With the keen instinct of 
the carrion crow, he had specialised in gambling, 
and soon became such a proficient in the law relating 
to that dubious calling, that his opinion was eagerly 
sought by disputants in the many quarrels which 

^ Danby was made Marquis of Caermarthen in 1689, and Duke 
of Leeds in 1694. 



THE RESORT TO CORRUPTION 75 

arose in connection with it. His shining merits had 
naturally attracted the notice of Jeffreys, then rapidly 
rising into office as the unscrupulous tool of Charles 
and James. Trevor became a bosom friend of the 
Chancellor, whom in vigour of vituperative epithet 
and capacity for drinking he was said soon to equal, 
if not to surpass. Needless to say, no scruple of 
conscience prevented him setting up as a rival of his 
distinguished patron ; and it was the opinion of 
many shrewd observers that, if James's reign had 
lasted but a year or so longer, he would have ousted 
that patron from the woolsack. As it was, he had 
become a King's Counsel, then Master of the Rolls, 
finally. Speaker of the House of Commons in the 
Parliament of James. Though, naturally, somewhat 
under a cloud in the Convention Parliament, in which 
he appears to have gained a seat only by the 
generosity of Maynard, he had had the courage, 
in company with another notorious hireling, Sir 
William Williams, to defend the practice of bribery 
at elections. He was, therefore, perfectly fitted, by 
experience and reputation, to essay the unsavoury 
task of corrupting his fellow-members ; and, that he 
might be able to do his work the more efficiently, 
Lowther was instructed, as representative of the 
Government in the House, to propose his re-election 
as Speaker. It is no credit to the House that, even 
with such a recommendation, it elected Trevor 
without a protest, and thus delivered itself over to an 
influence which many of the members must have 
known was of the most degraded kind. Determined 
not to do things by halves, Danby, two months later, 



^6 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

procured the substitution of Trevor for Maynard in 
the post of First Commissioner of the Great Seal ; 
and, in 1692, on the death of Powell, Trevor was 
reappointed to his old office of Master of the Rolls, 
thus filling the two inconsistent positions of superior 
and subordinate judge in the Court of Chancery. 

If William had not shrunk from the hard necessity 
of stooping to measures which he loathed from the 
bottom of his soul, he had at least the satisfaction of 
finding that the desperate remedy had been effectual. 
The opposition to the Gov-ernment ceased as if by 
magic. The King's regular revenue was settled upon 
terms which, though they did not in all respects 
please him, he was fain to admit were generous. 
The hereditary revenues of the Crown were declared 
to belong to him and Mary as of right. The moiety 
of the Excise which, at the Restoration, had been 
settled on Charles II. as a compensation for the loss 
of the feudal dues, was continued to William and 
Mary for their joint lives and the life of the survivor. 
The Customs duties were only granted for a term of 
four years, on the plea that a grant for a fixed period 
afforded a better security to the Government creditors 
than a grant for lives which might drop at any 
moment. William, not unnaturally, complained that 
it was hard that he should be less trusted than James, 
who had the Customs for life ; but was soothed by 
the representation that it was not he, but his 
successors, whom the Commons did not trust. A 
sum of ^1,200,000 was voted for the immediate 
necessities of war in Ireland and against France. 
After some little jangling about words, a Bill was 



CAMPAIGN IN IRELAND 77 

passed to confirm all the proceedings of the Con- 
vention Parliament, and to remove any doubts which 
might exist about the legality of its existence. Part 
of the bargain with the Tories had been a new Com- 
mission of Lieutenancy for the City of London, 
formerly the great stronghold of the Whigs ; and the 
Commission received the formal approval of the 
House, which refused even to admit the sheriffs, who 
came with a petition against it. It is true that the 
Abjuration Bill, after being read a second time, fell 
on the motion to go into Committee ; but the re- 
presentatives of the Government did not press the 
measure, and it is more than doubtful if William 
really wished it to pass. Finally the Pardon Bill, 
which William did undoubtedly desire, at last 
came through the Houses ; and the King was able 
to set out for Ireland with a reasonable hope that 
England would remain undisturbed during his 
absence. Before departing, however, he prudently 
prorogued the Parliament. He also appointed a 
Council of Nine to assist the Queen, who, by a 
special Act of Parliament, had been named Regent 
during his absence. But the fact that, in this Council, 
the great political parties were almost equally re- 
presented, seems to show that the modern conception 
of Cabinet Government was, despite the success 
of the new expedient, as far from William's mind 
as ever. 

P'or some time, however, the effects of the 
experiment continued to be felt. The brilliant 
success of William's campaign in Ireland counter- 
acted the depression produced by the defeat of 



78 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

Torrington at Beachy Head. On his return to 
England, the King found himself, for the first time, 
really popular. The autumn session of 1690 was 
a halcyon period of calm. The legislative product 
of the period consisted of fifteen statutes. No less 
than five of these were Money Acts, granting in all 
a sum of ;^5, 000,000 (an enormous sum in those days) 
towards the royal necessities. Of the remaining ten, 
half were measures of a distinctly "government" 
character, such as the two Acts for prohibiting trade 
with France, the Militia Act, the Mutiny Act, and 
the Act passed, in view of Torrington's approaching 
trial, for strengthening the position of the Admiralty 
Board. One very significant and important measure, 
it is true, appeared to show some distrust of the 
Administration. This was the Act which appointed 
a body of Parliamentary Commissioners to inspect 
the Government accounts. Unhappily, no record of 
the debates on this measure survives ; and we are, 
therefore, somewhat at a loss to discover the motives 
which prompted it.^ But there is no reason to suppose 
that the Houses were actuated by anything more 
than ordinary prudence in requiring an account of 
such a vast expenditure as they had authorised ; and 
there is no evidence that William was at all offended 
by the measure, as Charles H. had been on a 
similar occasion. Encouraged, on the other hand, 
by the new spirit of friendliness, the King determined 
to continue his new policy, by calling Godolphin to 
the position of First Lord of the Treasury, Lowther 

' It is even possible that the measure was introduced by Lowther 
himself. 



I 



GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE 79 

being provided for elsewhere. Inasmuch as Shrews- 
bury had resigned the Secretaryship of State earHer 
in the year, the new appointment meant a gain of 
two places to the Tories. But, once more, we must be 
careful not to lay too much stress on the move ; for 
Shrewsbury's place was, at the end of the year, 
filled by the appointment of Sidney. And Sidney, 
if he had any political feeling at all, was a 
Whig. 

Again, however, in the session of 1691, the old 
spirit began to reappear. The cost of the French 
war was growing with frightful rapidity ; the results 
hardly seemed equal to the charge. The war in 
Ireland was at an end ; but the demands on the 
country's purse were as heavy as ever. The un- 
official Tory members began to realise that they were 
being sold by their leaders, and that the plausible 
speeches in support of Lowther's proposals came 
from men who had received places and pensions at 
Trevor's suggestion. The Report of the Commis- 
sioners of Accounts appointed in the previous year 
contained startling items. Unhappily, it has not 
come down to us in its original form ; but we know 
that it led to plain speaking. The House demanded 
details of the vast sums allotted to " secret services." 
It was told that the only person capable of giving 
the information was Jephson, the Secretary of the 
Treasury, and that he was just dead. The Com- 
missioners were fain to confess that no regular 
accounts had been drawn up by the Exchequer for 
thirty years past ; the Treasury officials made the lame 
excuse that their neglect was due to an unwillingness 



80 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

to give the bankers, whom Charles II. had cheated, 
a legal claim against the State, by admitting liability 
in an official document. The practice of exacting 
percentages by way of fees in the public offices had 
grown up in the last few years, and the sudden 
increase in the expenditure had enormously increased 
the incomes of the officials. Many of them were 
members of the House of Commons, and thus had 
a direct interest in voting the taxes on which they 
afterwards received a percentage. Sir John Lowther 
was indignant at being told that he was " gagged by 
offices " ; and, no doubt, to a man of his wealth, the 
mere profits of his official posts were unimportant. 
But it was perfectly true that, since he had been 
manager for the Crown in the House, his attitude on 
political questions had considerably changed. He 
even ventured to question the right of the House to 
inquire into the distribution of the secret service 
money. The House waxed indignant, and ordered 
the Commissioners to make a full return of salaries, 
pensions, and fees. Alarmed by this attitude, and 
thinking to strengthen their hands, the Government 
induced Sir Edward Seymour to join the Treasury 
Board. But the only result was to destroy Seymour's 
influence in the House. 

The hostility to the war and the system of 
Ministerial corruption came from the independent 
Tories. But the Whigs were not slow to see a chance 
of recovering their lost ground. During the anxiety 
of the previous year, the question of criminal trials 
had been prominent. Though Preston and Ashton 
had been treated with scrupulous fairness, as the law 



CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS 8 1 

then stood, it was felt that the law itself required 
alteration. Historically speaking, a prosecution for 
crime was a mere examination by royal officials of 
a person already accused by the testimony of his 
neighbours. According to medieval ideas, there was 
little doubt of such a person's guilt. He was not 
entitled to the privilege of a defendant in a private 
action. No copy of his indictment was furnished to 
him ; for he was supposed to have heard the accusation 
of the grand jury. He was entitled to " challenge " or 
object to a certain number of the petty jury by 
whom he was to be tried ; but he could not demand 
to know, before the trial, the names of the jurors, 
and he was therefore unable to make any previous 
inquiries as to their character. He was not entitled 
to be represented by counsel, unless a point of law 
arose upon the pleadings. He could not compel 
witnesses to undertake the dangerous part of testify- 
ing against the Crown. In the two previous reigns 
the royal officials had shamefully abused the powers 
which the survival of these ideas had placed in their 
hands. The trials of Stafford, Algernon Sidney, and 
Lord Russell had been little less than judicial 
murders ; and, in Sidney's case, even the wholesome 
rule which required two witnesses to prove a charge 
of treason had been scandalously evaded. The 
pleasantries of Scroggs and Jeffreys on such 
occasions were fresh in men's memories; and, in 
spite of the wholesome purging of the judicial bench, 
the demand for the improved tenure of the judicial 
office had not yet been granted. The Whigs now 
brought in a Bill to regulate trials for treason ; and 

7 



82 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

the measure received the approval of the indepen- 
dent Tories. But the Ministerial supporters talked 
about " embarrassing- the Government " ; and, by 
playing skilfully on the susceptibilities of the peers, 
who preferred to believe that their special privileges 
were being attacked, very nearly produced a fatal 
quarrel between the Houses. Bills were introduced 
to regulate salaries and reduce the fees of offices ; 
but the Government managed to procure their 
rejection in the Lords. When, at the beginning of 
the year 1692, a further demand of money was made 
on behalf of the Crown, even the Tory members 
suggested that highly paid officials might well con- 
tribute a handsome subscription out of their salaries. 
Gradually the indignation of the independent 
members concentrated itself upon the support of 
two measures, one for the exclusion from the House 
of Commons of all persons holding offices or pensions 
from the Crown (usually known as the " Place Bill "), 
the other, the Triennial Bill, for limiting the duration 
of Parliament to three years. The object of both 
measures was, of course, the same ; for a member 
whose seat was only secure for three years, was, 
naturally, less valuable as a supporter of the Ministry 
than one whose vote could be reckoned on for an 
unlimited time. The debates on these measures were 
long and heated ; and at last the King, in his despair 
at the fatal illness of Mary, accepted the Triennial 
Act, though he resolutely refused to give his consent 
to the Place Bill. 

The conduct, both of the Government and the 
Opposition, at this crisis, warns us that we must still 



PARTIES IN COUNCIL 83 

look upon the Cabinet system of administration as 
a plan which had not yet been accepted by political 
leaders of the day. Had Lowther and his friends 
regarded themselves as dependent upon the support 
of the House of Commons, they must have resigned 
when the two Bills were carried in the teeth of 
their strongest protests. Had the Whigs regarded 
themselves as the exponents of such a system, they 
would never have urged measures which, as they must 
have seen, would have been fatal, or almost fatal, to 
its success. In so far as the principle upon which 
such system must be based was understood at all, 
it was regarded with dislike by both parties. " All 
debates should be in Council, now all things 
are huddled up," said Sir John Thompson, the 
Tory member for Gatton. Howe, who was then 
an extreme Whig, if not a Republican, attributed 
the rejection of the Place Bill to " parties in 
Council." 

Nevertheless, the inexorable logic of circumstances 
seemed to be bringing about this result. The Whigs 
stoutly protested that their measures were directed, 
not against the King, but against the King's 
Ministers. They were, really, far more in sympathy 
with William's personal views than were William's 
own servants. They approved of the French war, 
on which William's heart was set ; they hated, as he 
did, the exclusive pretensions of the Established 
Church. During the sessions of 1693 and 1694 they 
had coalesced into a well-disciplined force, under 
leaders of great ability — Somers, who was made Lord 
Keeper in 1693, Russell, the victor of La Hogue 



84 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

Wharton, the prince of wire-pullers, Montagu,^ the 
founder of the Bank of England, whose great 
financial talents had given him, though a Whig, a 
seat at the Treasury Board, even when the Tories pre- 
dominated. In the following year came the exposure 
of those corrupt practices, the existence of which had 
so long been suspected. Danby, now Duke of 
Leeds, was convicted of gross corruption over the 
renewal of the East India Company's charter. 
Trevor, the organ of corruption in the Lower House, 
was proved to have received a bribe of a thousand 
guineas to forward a private Bill promoted by the 
City of London — a Bill, moreover, which seems to 
have perpetrated a gross injustice at the expense of 
helpless poverty. He had to submit to the unique 
disgrace of putting, as Speaker, the vote for his own 
condemnation. Further inquiries led to the revela- 
tion of a wholesale system of corruption. Notting- 
ham, Sir Thomas Cooke, and Sir Basil Firebrace 
were implicated in the East India scandals. The 
management of the army was equally corrupt. 
Several regimental agents were committed to the 
Tower for embezzlement. Colonel Hastings was 
cashiered. Three of the Hackney Coach Commis- 
sioners were removed for corruption ; and Henry 
Guy, Jephson's successor in the perilous post of 
Secretary to the Treasury, was sent to prison. 

* On the extinction, in 17CXD, of the titles of the Marquis ot 
Halifax (Savile), William, with thoughtless disregard of the perplexities 
of the future student of history, created Montagu Baron Halifax, 
The new baron was made an earl in 17 14, but he never acquired the 
title of Marquis. 




Photo by\ {Walker 6^ Cockerell. 

CHARLES MONTAGU (HALIFAX) (1661-I715). 

Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



86 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

It is to this crisis, if we are to accept the general 
view of historians, and to the advice of the elder 
Sunderland, that we owe the definite adoption of the 
Cabinet system of government. The claim is so 
startling, and so inherently improbable, that it is 
worth while to devote a little time to the examina- 
tion of it. 

In the first place, it may be pointed out that, of all 
men in the world, Sunderland appears to have been 
the least likely author of such a suggestion. His 
political career proves him to have been a mere office- 
seeker of the most unscrupulous type. He made his 
entry into politics by the degrading process of court- 
ing Charles's mistresses. His special patron was the 
Duchess of Portsmouth ; and, when her influence 
did not succeed in procuring for him the honours and 
rewards which he deemed to be justly due to his 
merit, he had no hesitation in coquetting with the 
supporters of Monmouth, and even furthered the 
negotiations with the Prince of Orange. His zeal for 
Protestantism induced him to vote for the Exclusion 
Bill ; but, in the reaction which followed the Popish 
Plot, he changed completely round, and, on the ac- 
cession of James, openly declared himself a Catholic, 
having first, with devilish heartlessness, procured the 
apostasy of his eldest son, by way of experiment. 
He was darkly suspected of having ensured the doom 
of Monmouth, his former friend, by treachery of the 
most fiendish kind ; and it is quite certain that he 
accepted bribes from the French King to betray his 
country. But he could not even be true to his new 
masters. While he was actively supporting the worst 



I 



RETURN OF SUNDERLAND 87 

excesses of Popery and arbitrary power, he was 
actually engaged once more in correspondence with 
William ; and, in order to shield himself from sus- 
picion, he did not scruple to prostitute his own wife 
to his own uncle, then British Ambassador at the 
Hague. Of all the political figures of the age, he is 
the most treacherous, the most hypocritical, the most 
scandalous, the most utterly despicable. 

And yet it is true that, before the year 1695, Sun- 
derland had returned to England from that voluntary 
exile which, at the Revolution, alone saved him from 
the just vengeance of the men whom he had duped 
and betrayed. Presuming upon William's mildness 
of temper, he had, in defiance of his express exclusion 
from the Act of Pardon, slunk back into the House 
of Lords, and even into the palace. It is, unhappily, 
true that William condescended to listen to his 
advice ; and it may be true, that Sunderland recom- 
mended to the King to admit more Whigs into office. 
But for such advice there was a very obvious and 
personal reason. Sunderland was despised and dis- 
liked by the Whigs ; but the Whigs did not thirst 
for his blood. They had never trusted him ; and his 
evil conduct in James's reign had but strengthened 
their cause. Moreover, he had rendered powerful 
direct services to William at the time of the Revolu- 
tion ; and, odious as these services were, no Whig 
could deny their value. But by the Tories, and, still 
more by the Jacobites, Sunderland was loathed and 
hated ; while to James himself he was that most 
abhorred of all creatures, an apostate from Romanism. 
His life would not have been worth a day's purchase 



88 THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

if a turn of the wheel had restored the Stuarts, 
And Sunderland knew enough to fear that a Tory 
Ministry might end in the recall of James. 

Moreover, there is little in the actual events of the 
-period which justifies the contention that it marks 
the inauguration of Cabinet government. A mere 
enumeration of the chief official changes during the 
years 1693-5 is enough to dispel the suggestion 
that the doctrine of Ministerial responsibility was 
accepted by the King. There was much shuffling 
of offices in the spring of 1693. As we have 
said, Trevor was rewarded for his unclean services 
with his old post of Master of the Rolls, then 
vacant by the death of his rival, Powell. Rus- 
sell was dismissed from the Admiralty ; and the 
Admiralty Board, when reconstituted, included the 
unquestionably Tory names of Lowther, Killegrew, 
Delaval, and Rich. On the other hand, the great 
Whig leader, Somers, was made Lord Keeper at the 
same time ; and the Tory Nottingham was replaced, 
as Secretary of State, by the Whig Trenchard. A 
similarly impartial redistribution took place in the 
following year. Russell was, it is true, restored to 
the Admiralty ; and Fox and Montagu, both strong 
Whigs, received places at the Treasury Board, Mon- 
tagu being, soon afterwards, made Chancellor of the 
Exchequer. But the Whig proclivities of Montagu 
and Fox at the Treasury were more than counter- 
balanced by the presence of Godolphin, who did not 
retire till 1697 ; and even the scandalous revelations 
of 1695 did not prevent Dan by retaining the great 
office of Lord President of the Council. In truth, as 




Photo by\ [ Walker & Cockerell 

LORD SOMERS (165I-1716). 

Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



go THE LAST OF THE OLD ORDER 

Burnet puts it, "the King studied only to balance 
them, and to keep up among the Parties a jealousy 
of one another, that so he might oblige them all to 
depend more entirely on himself." 

It must, in fact, be admitted, that William never 
did become, never could have become, a constitu- 
tional ruler in the modern sense of the term. It 
was impossible that a man of his commanding ability 
and high character should allow himself to be the 
mere mouthpiece of men whom, for the most part, 
he must have both despised and disliked. He might 
have accepted such a position if it had been offered 
to him at the outset ; though that is unlikely. If he 
had accepted it, he would have played the part cor- 
rectly ; for faithfulness to his engagements was one 
of William's strongest qualities. But, as has been 
pointed out, no tradition of English politics, much less 
any formal rule of the Constitution, prescribed such a 
course to the monarch whose throne William assumed : 
and he was the last man in the world to create such 
a situation. His ear was always open to the advice 
of any Englishman whose position entitled him to 
give advice ; but he reserved to himself the right of 
decision. Not even to the Houses of Parliament 
would he yield, unless his judgment concurred with 
that of the Houses. In his view, the King was as 
much an essential part of Parliament as the Houses 
themselves — or rather, as he would, perhaps, himself 
have put it, the King can act without Parliament, 
but Parliament cannot act without the King. And 
no responsible statesman could possibly have con- 
tended, in those days, that William's view was wrong. 



ATTITUDE OF WILLIAM 



91 



The balance of power in the Constitution, after long 
inclining towards the Crown, was then trembling on 
the needle ; but it had not yet dipped decisively 
towards Parliament. The event which was definitely 
to mark the change was the death of William 
himself. 




IV 



SIGNS OF CHANGE 

The tendency to exaggerate the antiquity of a 
favourite institution is deeply seated in human nature. 
How often have we not heard of the ParHaments of 
Henry 1 1., of the municipal corporations of Domesday, 
of the universities of King Alfred ? To analyse the 
causes of this tendency would be a useful task ; but 
this is not the place for the exercise. Here we must 
only be on the watch to prevent the distortion of the 
truth by a similar tendency. 

The danger is the greater that, as we have already 
seen, certain important elements in the system of the 
future had shown themselves at least as early as 
the reign of Charles H. But the point is, to dis- 
tinguish between the elements which are merely 
important, and those which are essential. No doubt 
it is important to the working of the Cabinet System, 
that the Cabinet should be composed of men of one 
way of thinking. But it is not essential. Many vast 
concerns are administered, and successfully adminis- 
tered, by committees and councils in which there are 



I 



ESSENTIALS OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 93 

Strong differences of opinion. It is only necessary 
that the minority shall, in each case, loyally accept 
the decision of the majority. No doubt it is very 
important that the Ministry of the day should be in 
accord with the sentiment of the House of Commons, 
although, as a fact, that principle was but imperfectly 
grasped before the time of William's death. But it is 
quite conceivable, and has sometimes happened in 
recent years, that the House of Commons may tolerate 
a Ministry of which it does not really approve, 
because it sees no chance of obtaining a better, or 
because it does not wish to be dissolved. No doubt, 
again, it is important to the smooth working of the 
Cabinet System, that the King should not be present 
at the meetings of Ministers. But it is perfectly pos- 
sible to imagine a monarch so impartial, so tolerant, 
and, it may be added, so patient, that his presence at 
Cabinet Councils would be no restraint in the freedom 
of discussion. The only absolutely essential features 
of the Cabinet System are (i) that the Cabinet should 
be composed mainly (if not wholly) of the actual 
occupants of great political offices ; (2) that the 
supreme conduct of the national administration should 
be in the hands of the Cabinet. Without the other 
features, Cabinet government might be difficult, but 
it would not be impossible. Without these two latter 
it would not be Cabinet government. 

This brief analysis will, perhaps, serve to show the 
mistake of those writers who date the commence- 
ment of the present system at any time before the 
death of William. It is not the want of knowledge, 
but the lack of the critical faculty, which has caused 



94 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

the error. Delighted to recognise in the reign of 
Charles II. certain of the obvious features of the 
Cabinet System, they have not stopped to consider 
whether these features are in themselves sufficient to 
constitute the system. Struck by the similarity of 
names, they have not asked themselves with suffi- 
cient care whether these names represent similar 
institutions. The word " Cabinet," for example, is 
familiar to all students of our literature from the 
days of the Elizabethan dramatists onwards. But at 
first it means almost anything except that which we 
understand by the term. And we are here concerned 
with things, not with words. 

Judging, then, by the facts, we shall not have great 
difficulty in realising, from the details of the fore- 
going chapters, how far the evolution of the Cabinet 
had proceeded at the close of the seventeenth cen- 
tury. The existence of strongly marked parties had 
drawn statesmen together into two fairly permanent 
groups. It was comparatively easy to say of a pro- 
minent politician, whether he called himself a Tory 
or a Whig. He might really be a Jacobite ; but he 
would still call himself a Tory, because it was safer. 
He might really be a Republican ; but, for a similar 
reason, he would call himself a Whig. Further than 
this, the reigning monarch was beginning to discover 
that, on the whole, he was likely to be better, that is, 
more pleasantly, served, if his chief servants were at 
union amongst themselves. William, at least, was 
rather doubtful whether the calm produced by such 
an union was not somewhat of the nature of the calm 
which precedes the storm ; but even he was inclined 



THE king's supremacy 95 

to hope for the best. Finally, it was also slowly 
appearing, that a Ministry which commanded the 
confidence of the House of Commons was able to 
do very much more for the King than a Ministry 
which did not. But no English monarch had as yet 
admitted, either in theory or in practice, that he was 
bound to change his Ministry at the bidding of the 
House of Commons. 

And, beyond and above all, no English monarch, 
and least of all William of Orange, had ever admitted 
that he was bound to obey the advice of his Ministers 
against his own judgment. It is odd that there should 
be any doubt upon this point ; for this was the pre- 
cise position which William had resolutely refused to 
accept in 1688, and the whole of his conduct showed 
that he adhered to his original resolution. We have 
seen that when William went to Ireland in 1690, he 
appointed a strong Council, which was, undoubtedly, 
intended to direct the policy of the State during his 
absence. What was this but to say, that he regarded 
Mary as on a different footing from himself in the con- 
duct of affairs ? When he returned, the Council was 
dissolved. What was this but to announce that the 
policy of the kingdom was once more in the hands 
of the King? No doubt William, on more than 
one occasion, gave way against his judgment ; but 
it was simply as a matter of diplomacy, to gain 
some weightier end. If Parliament would not vote 
him money, he could not carry on that war against 
France upon which his whole soul was set ; and 
therefore he was willing to give way on a minor 
point if Parliament would grant him money. But, 



96 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

if he could have secured funds elsewhere, he would 
no more have hesitated to declare war against the 
wishes of his Ministers than he would have abstained 
from going hunting without their permission. Over 
and over again he refused to follow the wishes of 
the party in power. Though the Triennial Act was 
won from him at a moment of deep personal distress, 
he steadily refused his consent to the Place Bill. He 
declined to sanction a policy of persecution against 
Dissenters, when such a course would have been 
highly popular. He took the advice of counsellors 
who had no sort of constitutional position, men like 
Bentinck, Zulestein, Albemarle, Auverquerque ; and 
did not hesitate to prefer it to that of his Ministers. 
He negatived the Bill to fix the judges' salaries, 
for very good reasons, as Macaulay has shown. He 
negatived the mischievous Elections Bill of 1696. 
Even his willingness to fall in with the famous 
suggestion attributed to Sunderland affords no proof 
of his acceptance of the Cabinet theory of govern- 
ment. As he had very few preferences among his 
English Ministers, and as he did not intend to be 
governed by any of them, it cost him little to try an 
experiment which might bring him some good, and 
certainly could do him little harm. Had William 
been keenly in sympathy with either political party, 
and yet consented to form a Ministry from the other 
the case would have been different. But it is 
notorious that, except on one or two points, he was 
a Gallio in English politics. 

In truth, the critical period in the evolution of the 
Cabinet System was, not the last half of the seven- 



GOVERNMENT OF ANNE 97 

teenth century, but the first half of the eighteenth. 
We may even draw the limits still closer. At the 
accession of Anne, the Cabinet System was a dimly 
formed project ; at the death of George I., only 
twenty-five years later, it was an accomplished fact. 
This is, of course, only another way of saying that, 
in the conduct of Anne and her successor, we ought 
to find, if our views are correct, that attitude towards 
their own office which is alone compatible with the 
existence of Cabinet government. 

It has been, no doubt, the fashion for historians to 
underestimate the capacity of Queen Anne ; and a 
recent essayist has done good service by protesting 
against the tendency. He has shown that, on one 
occasion at least, the personal resolution of Anne 
effected a change of Ministry. In the year 1710 the 
Whigs, notwithstanding their majority in Parliament, 
were dismissed, and replaced by Tories ; and the 
change was, undoubtedly, the personal act of the 
Queen. But, in truth, the crisis is really a striking 
example of the change which had come over the 
spirit of English politics since the death of William. 
If the Queen could have had her own way, the Tories 
would never have been out of office at all. Her ability 
was shown by her apprehension of the fact that the 
Whigs, though victorious in Parliament, had ruined 
themselves in the eyes of the country by the prose- 
cution of Sacheverel, and that they were, conse- 
quently, at her mercy. Her act was, therefore, in 
the modern sense of the word, "constitutional." 
She appealed from Parliament to the country, and, 
thereby, fulfilled what is admitted to be the supreme 

8 



98 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

duty of the monarch in a system such as ours, viz., 
to interpret aright the feelings of the nation. But it 
is necessary to be more precise. 

At the death of WiUiam III. there were in existence 
a Whig House of Commons and a Ministry of the 
old type, that is to say, a Ministry which contained 
members of both political parties. According to 
ancient usage, both would have expired with the 
death of the King ; but by a recent statute it had 
been provided that, on the demise of the Crown, the 
existing Parliament should continue in office for six 
months, unless sooner dissolved. The Queen had, 
therefore, a perfectly free hand; and she speedily 
showed her preference by entrusting to Tories the 
chief posts in the State. Godolphin was given the 
great office of Lord Treasurer. Rochester, the 
Queen's uncle, whose removal from the post of 
Viceroy of Ireland had been determined upon, 
but not completed, by William, was continued in 
his seat. Wright, the unworthy successor of Somers, 
continued to hold the Great Seal, though only as 
" Keeper." The High Tory Nottingham was made 
Secretary of State, with Hedges, his nominee, as his 
colleague. The Queen's husband, Prince George of 
Denmark, presumably a Tory (though he secretly 
sympathised with the aspirations of the Noncon- 
formists) became Lord High Admiral. Above all, 
Marlborough, now, by means of his wife's influence 
over the Queen, a very important personage, was 
created Captain-General of the Land Forces ; and, 
at this time, he was certainly a Tory. Almost 
the only Whig of any weight retained in office was 




Photo i>y] 



[ Walker &= Cockerell. 



LAURENCE HYDE, EARL OF ROCHESTER (164I-I71 1). 
Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



lOO SIGNS OF CHANGE 

Devonshire, who, moreover, had only the non-adminis- 
trative post of Lord Steward of the Household. 

The enthusiasm with which the accession of the 
Queen was received enabled the Tories to strike 
another blow at their opponents. In her first 
speech to Parliament, which had certainly been 
prepared for her by her Ministers, the Queen spoke 
of her heart as being " entirely English." The Whig 
House of Commons took the expression as reflecting 
on the memory of her predecessor, and resented it 
freely. Warned of the temper of the Commons by 
this incident, the Queen, so soon as the Civil List had 
been voted, dissolved Parliament, and the elections 
of the autumn returned a strong Tory majority. 

Thus was at once created the most favourable 
possible conjunction of circumstances for the intro- 
duction of the Cabinet System. The Queen, though, 
as has been admitted, by no means a cipher, was by 
nature lethargic and unsuspicious. With a strong 
sense of private duty, her public activity was in- 
clined to restrict itself almost wholly to Church 
matters. In these she found only too ardent a 
support from her Ministers, to whom she was, in 
consequence, ready to leave the management of 
secular business. Of William's deep feeling of re- 
sponsibility in political affairs, his firm devotion 
to justice, his profound knowledge of European 
diplomacy, she had absolutely nothing. Strong 
in their knowledge of the Queen's favour, and 
confident in their majority in the Commons, the 
Ministers felt their power, and determined to use it. 

Two matters of first-rate importance had been the 



FRANCE AND SCOTLAND lOI 

care of William in his dying moments. One of them 
was the war with France. The act of Louis XIV. in 
recognising, on the death of James II. in 1701, the 
claims of his son, the " Old Pretender," to the Crowns 
of England, Scotland, and Ireland, had roused the 
nation to an enthusiasm for the Revolution which 
William had in vain sought to inspire ; and the King 
had died, happy in the thought that his long-cherished 
plans would bear fruit at last. Even the Tories, 
lukewarm as they had long been on the subject, 
shared the national feelings ; and Marlborough, whose 
instincts were at least as much professional as political, 
took care that there should be no wavering. On 
May 4, 1702, war was formally declared against 
France and Spain, and the Captain-General departed 
on his fateful mission to the Low Countries, destined 
to be the theatre of a long and tragic struggle. The 
Whig Parliament had, of course, ardently supported 
the war ; and even the new House of Commons had 
followed suit. Here, at least, there could be no 
turning back. 

The other object of William's desire was equally 
important, and even more unquestionably wise. He 
had long viewed with anxiety the relations between 
England and Scotland. The natural attachment of 
the northern kingdom to the Stuart cause, the ancient 
connection between Scotland and France, were per- 
haps the features of the situation which impressed 
themselves most strongly upon him. The action of 
the Scottish Parliament at the time of the Revolution 
had been critical. The massacre of Glencoe and the 
failure of the Darien scheme had stirred up bitter 



102 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

hostility against England. No provision correspond- 
ing with the Act of Settlement had yet made any 
provision for the Scottish succession in the now- 
probable event of the death of Anne without issue. 
In the deep-seated differences between the two 
countries in the matter of Church government 
William saw grave cause for alarm. 

So manifest was the necessity for action that, even 
before the change of Ministers, the Queen had com- 
mitted herself to it in her first speech to Parliament. 
Her new advisers, whatever their private feelings, did 
not venture to go back on this announcement ; and, 
before the Whig Parliament was dissolved, they 
brought in a Bill to appoint Commissioners to treat 
of a Union. The Bill was, of course, passed ; but 
it was remarked that many of the Tories offered 
it a strenuous opposition, and, though they did not 
succeed in defeating it, they rendered its chances 
of success precarious by the intemperate bitterness 
of their reflections on the Scots. The conduct of the 
new Ministry was equally foolish. They procured 
the dismissal of William's Scottish representatives, 
and replaced them by their own nominees. The 
Duke of Queensberry was made Secretary of State 
and High Commissioner, the Marquis of Annandale 
President of the Council, Lord Tullibardine Privy 
Seal, Lord Seafield Chancellor, and Lord Boyle 
Treasurer. Most of these men, though they had 
submitted to William's government, were avowed 
Jacobites, who prided themselves on their opposition 
to the Revolution ; and the only question with them 
was, how far they would follow the directions of the 



THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT IO3 

English Ministers, and how far endeavour to carry 
out an independent Jacobite policy in Scotland. So 
openly were the principles of the Revolution derided 
by those in authority, that the Episcopalians, and 
even the Jacobites, felt confident of a restoration to 
their privileges, so soon as the Scottish Parliament 
should assemble. 

This event took place at the beginning of May, 
1703, and the dangers of the situation were at once 
manifest. Although the Estates passed a Bill to 
recognise the personal title of Anne,^ the recognition 
was grudgingly worded. But when the Ministers 
introduced a Bill of Toleration, which would have 
recognised the legal status of Episcopacy, a furious 
opposition, headed by Fletcher of Saltoun, at once 
broke out. Not only was the Toleration Bill 
defeated, but a new confirmation of the Presbyterian 
Settlement of 1689 was exacted from the reluctant 
Government, and then, flushed with their victory, 
the Opposition proceeded to bring in a drastic Act 
for the Security of the Kingdom. This measure, with 
a skilful appeal to the national fear of absorption, was 
aimed at imposing upon the future occupants of the 
throne a series of restrictions which, if enforced, 
would have converted the government into that of a 
Republic. Annual Parliaments were to be compulsory, 
and the power of dissolution was to be abolished. 
For every new peer created, an addition was to be 
made to the representatives of the Commons in the 
Estates. The royal right of veto was to be reduced 

^ This had been rendered necessary by the passing of the Scottish 
Claim of Right in 1689. 



I04 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

to a mere form. The decision of peace and war, and 
the appointment of all public offices, civil and military, 
were to belong to Parliament, without whose consent 
not a single regular soldier could be maintained, nor 
any pardon granted. The judges were to be ex- 
cluded from Parliament, and all ex-officio votes in the 
Estates abolished. With great astuteness, the framers 
of the Bill inserted a clause restricting its effect to 
monarchs who should also be Kings of England ; and 
thus secured the adhesion of those whose patriotism 
was stronger than their Toryism. Some even of the 
Ministers were believed to be favourable to the 
measure, and a significant discussion upon the possi- 
bilities of a Regency, in the event of this chosen 
successor being under age, showed the way in which 
some men's thoughts were turning.^ It was, of course, 
hardly possible that sincere Protestants, as most of 
the Scottish Whigs unquestionably were, should have 
seriously considered the possibility of a Catholic 
monarch ; or that any real cordiality should exist 
between them and the Jacobites. But, in the mean- 
time, the co-operation of the two parties placed 
the Government in an awkward position ; for the 
Bill was actually carried on August 13th by a 
majority of 59, and, when the High Commissioner 
announced that the Queen refused her consent, the 
W^hig leaders fiercely denied the royal power of 
veto,2 and the session was terminated by the High 
Commissioner without a vote of Supply. 

^ The Pretender was at this time only fifteen years old. 
2 This claim was by no means so extravagant as it sounds, but there 
was an awkward Act of 1660 against it. 



OCCASIONAL CONFORMITY BILL I05 

The Scottish Estates did not assemble again until 
July of 1704, and, the necessity for Supply being 
really urgent, the supporters of the Act of Security 
resolved to carry their measure by tacking it to the 
Money Bill. Realising the hopelessness of their 
position, the Government at last gave way, and the 
Act of Security received the royal assent. Even this 
surrender, however, only produced a six months' 
Supply. As for the prospects of Union, these 
appeared further off than ever, and indeed Burnet 
accuses the Ministers of having definitely abandoned 
the measure. 

Meanwhile, the real energies of the Government 
had been devoted to the furtherance, in the English 
Parliament, of the famous Occasional Conformity 
Bill. This measure was intended to put an end, in 
the interests of the Established Church, to a practice 
in itself bad enough, but the blame of which lay 
at least as much upon those who imposed it as on 
those who made use of it. The iron scheme of 
Anglican intolerance laid down by Clarendon at 
the Restoration, had excluded from royal and muni- 
cipal office all who refused to take the sacrament 
according to the rites of the Church of England. 
Many Nonconformists had steadily resisted all 
temptation to comply with a requirement against 
which their consciences revolted. But many others, 
of laxer principles, had consented to receive the 
Anglican Sacraments in order to qualify for office. 
The Test had, in fact, become a mere form. But 
now the Tories determined that the bonds of 
sectarianism should be tightened. The Occasional 



I06 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

Conformity Bill, which, though it was not formally 
introduced by a Minister, was strenuously backed 
by the whole weight of the Government, provided 
that a person who had qualified for office by 
taking the Sacrament, and afterwards been present 
at any religious service conducted otherwise than 
in accordance with the rites of the Church of England, 
should forfeit i^ioo for the offence, pay a fine of £^ 
a day so long as he continued to hold office, and be 
incapable of employment for at least a year after 
conforming to the requirements of the Test and 
Corporation Acts. 

It will be noticed that the framers of this measure 
had none of the excuses which, in the eyes of some 
thoughtful historians, go far to justify the original 
promoters of the Test and Corporation Acts. 
Clarendon and his colleagues had thought, and 
perhaps rightly, that the Dissenters were, as a body, 
opposed to the restoration of Charles II., and that 
their continuance in office would be a real danger to 
the State. The framers of the Occasional Conformity 
Bill knew well that the Protestant Dissenters, against 
whom the Bill was notoriously directed, were firmly 
attached to the Revolution settlement, under which 
Anne occupied the throne. The party whose loyalty 
was really doubtful was the very party which urged on 
the measure. It was, in fact, a pure piece of religious 
and political persecution, hypocritically disguised 
under the cloak of an affected reverence for the 
ordinances of the Church. The men who evaded 
the antiquated provisions of the Test and Corpora- 
tion Acts by the formal compliance with the statutory 



DISPUTED ELECTIONS \QJ 

provisions were always Dissenters and usually 
Whigs. That was sufficient, in the eyes of the 
Church and Tory party, to mark them out for 
ostracism. 

The Bill rapidly passed the Tory House of Com- 
mons by large majorities, but received a severe check 
in the House of Lords, where the Whig peers and 
several of William's bishops succeeded in introducing 
substantial amendments. A conference between the 
Houses followed ; but no agreement was arrived at, 
and the measure dropped for the session. In 
November, at the opening of the new session, it 
again rapidly passed through the Commons, but was 
again, as summarily, rejected by the Lords. The 
feeling between the Houses rose high, and eventually, 
in the spring of 1704, culminated over an event which 
excited great interest at the time, and which (though 
its importance in that respect has been overlooked), 
was of considerable consequence to the future of the 
Cabinet System. 

At the beginning of the seventeenth century, 
the Commons had successfully vindicated their right 
to be the sole judges of disputed elections to their 
own body. The achievement was one of the earliest 
of the victories of Parliament over James L, and it 
was a real step in the direction of freedom. But, 
with the growth of the Party System, it soon became 
obvious, that election decisions were no whit more 
impartial in the House of Commons than they had 
been in the royal Chancery. The more powerful 
party simply voted for its own candidate, in spite 
of the clearest evidence, or, better still, influenced 



I08 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

the returning officer to refuse the votes of electors 
known to be unfavourable to itself. 

An example of the latter practice had recently 
occurred. At the elections in January, 1700, one 
Matthew Ashby had tendered his vote at the Ayles- 
bury poll, and it had been refused by the returning 
officer, the Mayor, apparently on no good ground. 
Instead of petitioning against the return, Ashby took 
the novel step of bringing an action against the 
Mayor for violation of a common-law right. He 
thus transferred the decision of the question from the 
House of Commons to the County Assizes. Here he 
was successful in obtaining a verdict for damages; but 
the Court of Queen's Bench in London, with whom it 
rested to pronounce judgment, refused, against the 
opinion of Chief Justice Holt, to follow the verdict. 
Therefore Ashby appealed to the House of Lords, 
not as a House of Parliament, but as the supreme 
appellate tribunal of the kingdom ; and the Lords, 
by a large majority, reversed the judgment of the 
Queen's Bench, and ordered judgment to be entered 
for Ashby. 

It will be observed that this decision did not 
directly infringe the privileges of the House of 
Commons. Ashby's vote was, for that election at 
least, irrevocably lost ; and, had the question subse- 
quently come before the House of Commons as an 
election petition, the House would have been legally 
entitled to disregard the judgment. But it obviously 
threatened to make the misconduct of returning 
officers a costly offence, even when countenanced by 
the party in power ; and it manifestly threw upon 



THE AYLESBURY CASE IO9 

the Commons the responsibihty for a partiahty which 
they would fain have shifted elsewhere. It may be 
well admitted, that the dual position of the House of 
Lords, as a branch of the legislature and also the 
supreme common-law tribunal, was an anomaly. It 
was, however, an anomaly which had grown up with 
the Constitution ; and it ill became the party which 
professed to regard the ancient order with almost 
superstitious reverence, to attempt the violation of an 
ancient rule. 

But party spirit knows no logic, and, chafing at 
its rebuff over the Occasional Conformity Bill, the 
House of Commons flew upon the decision in the 
Aylesbury case, determining to treat it as a breach of 
privilege. As it could not well be denied that, if the 
question of Ashby's right to vote was triable by the 
ordinary tribunals, the appeal to the House of Lords 
followed as of course, the Commons were under the 
necessity of repudiating altogether the jurisdiction 
of the ordinary tribunals in such cases. This was 
a particularly difficult position to take up, for, no 
longer than eight years before, an Act of Parliament 
had expressly declared the right of a duly elected 
candidate to recover damages against a returning 
officer for a false or double return. Swallowing the 
inconsistency, however, and ignoring some admirably 
reasoned protests against the course proposed, the 
House, after a prolonged sitting, adopted a series of 
five resolutions, which declared Ashby's action to be 
a contempt of the jurisdiction of the House, and 
threatened him, and all others who should follow his 
example, with the consequences of breach of privilege. 



no S/G,\S OF CHANGE 

Not content with these steps, the House sounded the 
note of defiance by ordering the resohitions, signed 
by the clerk, to be affixed to Westminster Hall Gate. 
The Lords could not submit to such an affront, and 
ordered a Committee to search for precedents, with 
the result that the Upper House passed a series of 
counter-resolutions affirming, in temperate language, 
the common-law rights of the subject, and declaring, 
with undeniable force, the claims of the Commons to 
be, in effect, a manifest attempt to assert a vote of 
that House to be superior to the law of the land. 
Encouraged by this action, five other persons, whose 
votes had likewise been rejected at the Aylesbury 
election, commenced proceedings against the return- 
ing officer; whereupon the House of Commons, upon 
its reassembling in the autumn of 1704, committed 
the " Aylesbury Men " (as the new suitors were 
called) for breach of privilege, and, upon their 
application for enlargement on Habeas Corpus^ the 
Court of Queen's Bench refused to interfere. There- 
upon the prisoners applied for a second Writ of Error, 
which would have once more brought the question 
before the Lords ; but, though the granting of such a 
writ was a mere formal preliminary to the appeal, the 
Commons took the extreme step of petitioning the 
Queen to refuse it, alleging the extraordinary reason, 
that they had been liberal in voting the supplies 
demanded by the Crown. Not content with this 
outrageous defiance of the principles of justice, the 
House went still further, and committed to the custody 
of the Serjeant-at-arms two of the counsel who had 
appeared for the Aylesbury Men. Meanwhile, the 



DIVISIONS IN THE MINISTRY III 

High Tories in the Commons had made a third and 
desperate attempt to push through their favourite 
Occasional Conformity Bill, by tacking it to a Bill of 
Supply ; and, though they failed in this extreme 
proposal, the Bill was once more carried and sent 
up to the Lords, who, however, notwithstanding 
the presence of the Queen at the debate, again 
rejected it by a decisive majority. Other quarrels 
between the Houses arose, and, finally, the Ministry 
were glad to escape from an intolerable position, by 
advising the Queen to prorogue Parliament, with the 
unpleasant prospect of having to face a General 
Election with greatly impaired popularity. 

A still greater danger to the stability of the 
Ministry lay in the fact, that a division had already 
appeared in its own ranks. Marlborough and 
Godolphin cared very little for the Anglican enthu- 
siasm of Nottingham and the High Tories ; their 
main object was the successful prosecution of the war. 
On the other hand, Nottingham and his friends were 
but lukewarm on the subject of the war, which they 
regarded as a Whig legacy bequeathed by William. 
The feelings of the two sections had become em- 
bittered as early as 1704; and the influence of 
Marlborough's wife was sufficient to turn the scale 
against the men whom her husband accused of 
starving the campaigns. Greatly to his chagrin, 
Nottingham's offer of resignation had been accepted 
by the Queen, and his place, and that of Rochester, 
who had retired in a private quarrel in 1702, had 
been taken by Harley and St. John. The latter, 
though undoubtedly Tories, were, in 1704, not of 



112 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

sufficient importance to cause serious anxiety to 
Marlborough and Godolphin. The change was 
immediately followed by the brilliant victory of 
Blenheim, the greatest land achievement of English 
troops since the day of Agincourt. The nation 
became enthusiastic over the victor, whose affection 
for his Tory friends had not been increased by their 
refusal, in 1702, to adopt the Queen's suggestion that 
a pension of ^5,000 a year should be settled upon 
him for the support of his new dukedom. Marl- 
borough and Godolphin gradually drew towards the 
Whigs, whose support of the war was genuine and 
hearty ; and they only awaited the result of the 
elections to declare themselves openly. The elections 
took place in the summer of 1705, and the Whigs 
secured a substantial majority, as was proved by the" 
struggle over the Speakership which took place 
immediately on the assembling of Parliament, and in 
which the Whig candidate. Smith, was victorious over 
Bromley, the Tory member for Oxford University, 
by a majority of 43 votes. The blow was 
immediately followed up. Wright, the Tory Lord 
Keeper, was dismissed, and his place taken by 
Cowper, the leader of the Whig party in the House 
of Commons. Even more significant than the 
appointment was the fact that it was negotiated 
through the veteran Whig statesman, Montagu, 
now Baron Halifax. In the following year (1706) 
the younger Sunderland, a strong Whig, became 
Secretary of State. Thus, though Harley and St. 
John retained their offices until 1708, the Cabinet 
became practically Whig ; for Godolphin and Marl- 




Photo by\ [ Walker &= Cocker ell. 

ROBERT HARLEY, EARL OF OXFORD (1661-I724). 

Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



114 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

borough must now be reckoned to have broken 
decidedly with their former alHes. 

If an exact date be fixed for the commencement of 
the Cabinet System, the year 1705 has far greater 
claims than any which preceded it. The change of 
policy was complete. The Queen wrote in a private 
letter, that " Rochester and Nottingham had so 
behaved themselves that it was impossible for her 
ever to employ them again, and that she looked for 
support from the Whigs!' The first part of this 
sentence sounds of the old days, when the personal 
feelings of the monarch were the sole avenue to high 
office. But the latter clause is eminently suggestive. 
It must have been very hard for Anne to write such 
words. In spite of the personal influence of the 
Duchess of Marlborough, the Queen remained a 
convinced Tory to the end of her days. It can 
scarcely have been anything less than the force of 
public opinion, as manifested by the elections, which 
caused her to take the unpleasant step. 

Almost immediately afterwards, there occurred 
another event of the greatest importance in the 
history of the Cabinet System. One of the first 
cares of the new Government, after the meeting of 
Parliament in the autumn of 1705, was to introduce a 
measure for the further security of the Hanoverian 
succession. The chief object of the measure, which 
was initiated with great solemnity in the House of 
Lords, was to arrange a careful plan for the dangerous 
crisis which would inevitably occur if, at the death of 
the Queen, her destined successor were not within the 
kingdom. The Bill was specially entrusted to the 



I 



HANOVERIAN SUCCESSION II5 

judges to be drafted ; but, when it reached the 
Committee stage in the House of Commons, an 
important amendment was proposed by the Tories, 
in alHance with a section of the Whigs which had not 
been altogether satisfied with the recent changes in 
office. When, in the year 1700, the death of the 
Httle Duke of Gloucester, the last survivor of Anne's 
numerous children, had rendered the question of the 
succession acute, even the Tory Parliament of that 
year had admitted the necessity for providing a 
Protestant successor in the too probable event of the 
failure of the Revolution dynasty. But, as the price 
of this concession, it had demanded the enactment of 
several clauses intended to guard against a repetition 
of the evils which it alleged to have been practised in 
the reign of William. It was, accordingly, provided, 
in the Act which settled the succession on the House 
of Hanover, that, after the accession of that House, no 
occupant of the throne should leave England without 
the consent of Parliament, that no foreigner should 
hold office or receive grants from the Crown, that no 
war should be entered upon by England on behalf 
of the foreign dominions of the monarch, that the 
judges' commissions should be made quamdiu bene 
se gesserint, and that they should be paid by fixed 
salaries instead of by fees, that all business properly 
belonging to the Privy Council should be there openly 
discussed and the resolutions thereupon signed by 
the members assenting thereto, and that no person 
holding office under or receiving a pension from 
the Crown, should be capable of sitting in the House 
of Commons. 



Il6 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

It was this last clause which the Tory opposition 
in 1705 desired to modify ; but there is little reason 
to believe that the desire arose from any other source 
than the conviction, that the framers of the Act of 
Settlement, in their zeal against William, had incurred 
the grave risk of rendering the House of Commons 
permanently inferior in power to the House of Lords, 
which had long been, and seemed likely long to 
be, predominantly Whig. For, if the holders of 
important political offices were not members of the 
Lower House, it was pretty certain that they would 
be members of the Upper ; and the centre of political 
business would therefore be permanently lodged in 
the House of Lords. 

The Opposition in 1705, accordingly, bent all its 
energies to modify the clause in question, and suc- 
ceeded in carrying in Committee an amendment to 
the effect that the acceptance of any of a list of speci- 
fied posts — comprising, in fact, the most important 
political offices in the Ministry — should not dis- 
qualify for membership of the Commons.^ The 
Lords, on the return of the Bill, not unnaturally 
objected to the form of the amendment, on the 
ground that, in effect, it claimed that the offices 
in question properly belonged, as of right, to the 
Commons. They were not, however, unwilling to 
make some concession, and suggested that the ex- 
clusion should be limited to persons holding new 

^ Burnet, in his "History" (vol. ii. p. 434), states the Commons' 
amendment in precisely the opposite way ; but the above is the 
account in the Journals of the House, and Burnet's statement renders 
the argument of the Lords unintelligible. 



BASIS OF THE CABINET SYSTEM liy 

offices— 2>., offices created after the date of the Act 
— and to pensioners. They also proposed to repeal 
entirely the clause of the Act of Settlement which re- 
quired the discussion of business in full Privy Council 
and the signature of resolutions, on the ground 
that no one would care to be a Privy Councillor on 
those terms. There was a good deal of discussion 
between the Houses, but, ultimately, the Lords' pro- 
posals were adopted, with the additional proviso that, 
though all acceptance of office should vacate seats, 
yet that the occupants of old offices should be capable 
of re-election. 

Thus Parliament arrived at the famous compro- 
mise, upon which the working of the Cabinet System 
rests at the present day. The abolition of the 
Privy Council clause rendered secret meetings of 
the Cabinet possible, and reduced the full Privy 
Council to a merely formal position. The partial 
restriction on the presence of officials in the House 
of Commons prevented the unlimited acquisition of 
influence in that House by a Government willing to 
create new offices ; and prepared the way for that 
modern system by which, undisturbed by the Minis- 
terial changes, the vast majority of Government 
officials enjoy permanent tenure of their posts. The 
re-election clause, though apparently important, has 
never been of any real value ; for a Government with 
a majority in the House of Commons can always 
find a seat for a rejected official, and a Government 
in a minority has either to resign or to appeal to the 
constituencies. 

Were it not for one fact, we could hardly hesitate 



Il8 SIGNS OF CHANGE 

to assign the passing of the Act of Security as the 
date which finally established the supremacy of the 
Cabinet System. By this enactment the last legal 
obstacle to the introduction of that system was 
removed, and the machinery of which the system 
is at the present day worked was brought into 
existence. But the curious fact remains, that in 
all the contemporary records of the period there 
is scarcely a hint that the significance of the change 
was understood. We have seen (p. Ii6, note i) that 
even so intelligent a critic as Burnet grossly mistook 
the character of the Commons' amendments. He 
could hardly have done this if a definite policy had 
been involved in the measure ; for Burnet himself took 
part in the debates in the House of Lords. There is, 
indeed, just one passage in the reasons assigned by 
the Lords, which seems to hint at a foresight of con- 
sequences. Their lordships allege that " had these 
privileged officers been excepted for the necessary 
information of the House (of Commons), one or two 
of a sort, or of each Commission, might have been 
sufficient." This passage certainly points to that con- 
nection between the Ministry and the House of 
Commons which is one striking feature of the Cabinet 
System ; but it does not recognise (and, indeed, the 
House of Lords would certainly have declined to 
admit) that the real centre of administration must 
rest in the Lower House. And, for the most part, 
the arguments used in this famous discussion, so far 
as they survive, are of a purely personal and partisan 
type. Looked at from the standpoint of historical 
criticism, there is nothing to show that the statesmen 



I 



AN UNCONSCIOUS DEVELOPMENT 



119 



of 1705-6 realised that they were preparing the way 
for a profound revolution in the system of govern- 
ment. And yet they were, in truth, entering upon a 
course, which was to influence the future of politics 
throughout the civilised world. 




V 



THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 



The man whose name will be for ever associated 
with the establishment of the Cabinet System in 
England was Sir Robert Walpole. He joined the 
Ministry I precisely at the date when, by the dis- 
missal of Harley and St. John, the first genuinely 
Whig Cabinet was formed, and the possibility of 
Cabinet government established. When he quitted 
public life, thirty-four years later, having held high 
office during most of the intervening • period, the 
Cabinet System had become, mainly through his 
agency, a part of the Constitution. 

The qualities which led to Walpole's rapid pro- 
motion and success are in themselves suggestive of 
a changed order of things. Hitherto the chief re- 
commendations to a political career had been Court 
favour, the possession of great hereditary rank and 
wealth, and, in a few cases, of which that of Somers 
is the most conspicuous, striking political talent. 

^ He had been appointed a member of the Council of Prince George 
of Denmark, Lord High Admiral, in 1 705 ; but the post was of small 
importance. 




Photo by] [_lValker &' Cocker ell. 

SIR ROBERT WALPOLE (1676-I745). 

Portrait by J. B. Van Loo, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



122 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

Walpole had none of these. In spite of his address, 
he was never really a Court favourite. His manners 
were coarse and abrupt, and he was too good a Whig 
to be personally acceptable to rulers who still believed 
in the divine sanction of prerogative. Though his 
birth was respectable, and his income sufficient to 
enable him to live hospitably, he could make no 
claim to rank with great noblemen whose ancestors 
had been for generations prominent figures in the 
State, and whose houses rivalled the palaces of 
kings. Though a ready and powerful debater, he 
had none of the eloquence which imposes respect, 
even on opponents, and none of the commanding 
intellect which compels the reluctant admiration of 
the world. 

But he had gifts and qualities more useful for 
the part which he was called upon to play. 
Himself a country gentleman of moderate estate, 
passionately fond of all that made the chief delight 
of the country gentleman of his time — the chase, the 
preservation of game, the exercise of rough hospi- 
tality — he was specially fitted to win his way with a 
class whose avowed faithfulness to the exiled House 
of Stuart made one of the chief political dangers of 
his day. Loyally attached to the Church of England, 
and free from all suspicion of unorthodoxy, he was 
equally fitted to deal with another grave problem of 
the situation, the secret disaffection of the clergy, 
whose dislike of the fervent Catholicism of the 
Stuarts alone rendered the acceptance of the House 
of Hanover possible. The devoted adherents of the 
Church, Tories though they were, looked with an eye 



CHARACTER OF WALPOLE 1 23 

of tolerance on the Minister who was known to have 
disliked the prosecution of Sacheverel, and who 
steadily refused, even at the request of a Queen, to 
read Butler's " Analogy," on the ground that " his 
religion was fixed, and he neither wished to change 
nor improve it." The son-in-law of a Lord Mayor 
of London, he won his way easily among the rapidly 
rising class of merchants, whose support proved of 
such inestimable value to an unpopular Government 
in the days of the first two Georges, and from whom 
he doubtless learnt those sound principles of finance, 
which enabled him to rescue the country from the 
despair of the South Sea Bubble, and to introduce 
order and practical sense into an antiquated fiscal 
system. Utterly unscrupulous in details, he was yet 
rigidly faithful in his allegiance to his party, whose 
cause he had championed with ardour from his 
college days. He enjoyed, therefore, the double 
advantage of being able to use coarse instruments, 
while at the same time setting an example of 
consistency which was perhaps, in the circumstances, 
the highest attainable form of political honesty, and 
which won him the respect, even of his enemies. 
" Robin and I are two honest men," said the stout 
old Jacobite leader, Shippen. " He is for King 
George, and I am for King James ; but these men 
with long cravats only desire places, either under 
King George or King James." In other words, it 
may be fairly claimed for Walpole, that, if his 
example did not favour personal purity, at least 
it encouraged political honesty. Finally, Walpole 
had the inestimable advantage of being free from 



124 ^^^ SYSTEM OF W A LP OLE 

political vanity. He never attempted to associate 
his name with great achievements at the expense 
of the nation. The gravest charge brought by 
history against Marlborough is, that he deliberately 
prolonged a costly and bloody war to enhance his 
own glory. Walpole was incapable of such a crime. 
Always seeking the line of least resistance, and 
setting the practical above the ideal, he was content 
to govern the country in the quietest possible way, to 
heal old sores, and to wink very hard at offences 
which did not really endanger the security of the 
State. And it happened that this attitude was 
exactly what was needed at the time. If St. John 
had been a Whig, and Walpole a Jacobite, it is long 
odds that the Revolution Settlement would have 
been destroyed, and the peace of the nation ruined. 
As it was, the peace of the nation was maintained, 
and the Jacobite cause destroyed. Happily for 
England, Walpole's vanity took an entirely harmless 
form. He believed himself to be a lady-killer. 

It was, however, several years before Walpole 
obtained that commanding position in politics which 
entitles us to regard him as the mainspring of political 
action in England ; and a brief sketch of the interval 
will serve to bring his work into clearer relief 

The Whig victory of 1705 was followed by a 
brilliant achievement in politics — no less than the 
Union between England and Scotland. The scope 
of this book does not permit of an adequate account 
of that notable event. It must be sufficient to say 
that, after having been the dream of ambitious states- 
men since the days of Edward I., its accomplishment 



UNION WITH SCOTLAND 1 25 

had become a practical necessity with the accession 
of the House of Stuart to the English throne, in the 
person of James, the Sixth of Scotland and First of 
England. That the two countries under different 
monarchs should be jealous rivals, possibly enemies, 
was bad enough. That, whilst nominally obeying the 
same ruler, they should be severed by distrust and 
commercial jealousy, was a standing danger to the 
very existence of the State. Especially was this the 
case when the expected change of dynasty, on the 
death of Anne, threatened to awaken actual hostility, 
through the possible preference of the Scots for the 
exiled House. We have seen how the mismanage- 
ment of the Queen's Tory Ministers threatened to 
defeat the dying hopes of William. So acute was the 
crisis that, even before the elections of 1705, the Whig 
majority in the Lords succeeded in passing drastic 
resolutions, to, the effect that, if the Union were not 
completed by Christmas in that year, all Scotchmen 
(with a few exceptions) should be thereafter regarded 
as aliens, all importation of Scottish cattle and goods 
into England and export of English wool into Scot- 
land prohibited, and all Scottish vessels trading to 
France captured as prize of war. Owing to quarrels 
between the Houses, the Lords' Bill founded on these 
resolutions was laid aside by the Commons ; but an 
almost equally drastic measure, brought forward in 
the Lower House, received the royal assent in 1705. 

It was now absolutely necessary that something 
should be done to end the strain ; and one of the 
first acts of the new Ministry, after the Whig triumph 
at the elections, was to secure the appointment of a 



126 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

new set of Commissioners to discuss the terms of 
Union. A happy augury of success was the agree- 
ment of both poHtical parties to the repeal of the 
hostile legislation of the previous session, which the 
Scots naturally regarded as rendering a friendly dis- 
cussion impossible. On April lO, 1706, after the 
prorogation of Parliament, the new Commissioners 
were formally appointed. Their 'meetings, more 
than once graced by the presence of the Queen 
herself, commenced a week later, and were con- 
cluded before the end of July. Very wisely, it 
was arranged that the Articles agreed on should 
be first submitted to the Scottish Parliament, so 
as to avoid all appearance of pressure by the 
stronger country. The Scottish Parliament met on 
October 3, 1706, and, in spite of strenuous opposition 
by many members, the Act of Ratification was finally 
passed, by a majority of no against 69, on January 
16, 1707 ; a special Act for the security of the Presby- 
terian Establishment having previously been touched 
by the royal sceptre. A fortnight later the Articles 
were presented to the English Parliament, and, after 
a corresponding provision had been made for the 
maintenance of the Episcopal Establishment in 
England, finally approved by statute on the 6th of 
March. 

The terms of the Union are so well known, and so 
readily accessible, that the very briefest summary of 
them may here suffice. The Union effected was for 
legislative and administrative purposes only, leaving 
matters of judicature and religion absolutely 
unaffected. It is true that, by the theory of the 



TERMS OF THE UNION 127 

Constitution (not, perhaps, so well understood then as 
now) the sovereign power of legislation claimed by 
the Parliament of Great Britain legally carried with 
it the power to alter judicial, and even ecclesiastical, 
arrangements in either country. But it was well 
understood at the time that this power would not be 
exercised against the will of the country affected ; 
and, with one or two notable exceptions,^ the under- 
standing has been honourably maintained. In theory 
also, the power to appoint the Scottish judges passed 
to the Ministry in London ; but, except in the case 
of the new Court of Exchequer, rendered necessary 
by the fiscal union of the two countries, the old 
system remained, judges in Scotland, as before the 
Union, being appointed from the ranks of the Scottish 
bar.2 Further than this, the whole systems of private 
law, or law affecting the ordinary dealings of citizen 
with citizen, remain distinct, for the most part, to this 
day in the two countries, such legislative changes as 
have been made having been sanctioned by the repre- 
sentatives of the country affected.3 But the whole 
conduct of the daily business of politics in Scotland 
passed, with the Union, from Edinburgh to London ; 



^ A conspicuous example was the restoration of private patronage in 
the Kirk in 1 7 12, one of the most mischievous measures of the Tory 
Ministry which came into office in 1 710. The aboHtion of the heritable 
jurisdictions in 1746, though expressly forbidden by the Union, was 
rendered necessary by the circumstances of the time. 

^ The Scottish Chancellor disappeared ; but in Scotland the 
Chancellor was not a judicial officer. 

3 The theoretical unity is clearly expressed in the rule, that every Act 
of the British Parliament is binding in Scotland, unless Scotland is 
expressly exempted. But exemptions are frequent. 



128 rnn svstmm op walpol^ 

the Scottish officers of State virtually disappeared ^ ; 
the military and fiscal systems of the two countries 
were united ; the two Crowns became one ; even the 
creation of new Scottish peers was forbidden ; and, 
perhaps most important of all, every commercial 
barrier and restriction between England and Scotland 
was absolutely broken down, every Scotchman 
became eligible for civil office throughout Great 
Britain and her colonies, and a uniform standard 
of weights, measures, and coinage ran throughout the 
two countries. 

Finally, in the legislature itself, Scotland became 
represented by sixteen peers, elected by their fellow- 
peers to serve in each Parliament, and by forty-five 
commoners. The position of the Article containing 
this provision is significant. Instead of appearing, as 
we should expect, at the very head of the Treaty, it 
ranks only twenty-second of the twenty-five clauses 
of which the Act is composed. The fact is, that 
the Parliament of Scotland had never attained, in Scot- 
land itself, anything like the dignity and importance 
achieved by its prototype in England. To the great 
mass of Scotchmen, it was inferior in interest 
to the General Assembly of the Kirk ; and the 
arrangement for its absorption excited comparatively 
little feeling. In one sense, no doubt, this was a 
fortunate thing. Had any fervour of national 
enthusiasm been associated with the Scottish 
Parliament, the Union could hardly have been 

^ One curious result of this fact was that the Lord Advocate (the 
equivalent of the English Attorney-General) became, in effect, 
Minister for Scotland in the central administration. 



VICTORIES OF MARLBOROUGH 1 29 

accomplished. But, in another respect, its con- 
sequences were of less indisputable advantage. The 
new Scottish members at Westminster found them- 
selves in a curious position. Their own countrymen 
took little account of their doings, of which indeed 
they knew nothing. The distinction of Whig and 
Tory was of small importance north of the Tweed, or 
at least it had there a different meaning from that 
which it conveyed in the south. The members them- 
selves were equally indifferent to the great bulk of 
the business which came before the British Parlia- 
ment. On the other hand, the Ministry of the day 
was extremely anxious to secure their votes, and 
willing to pay handsomely for them. Especially was 
it willing to pay for them with the minor Scottish 
patronage, which the extinction of the Scottish 
Executive had placed at its disposal. The bargain 
was soon struck ; and it is not a little curious that so 
few historians have perceived the importance of the 
Union in thus assisting the development of the 
Cabinet System. 

The great civil achievement of the Union was 
followed by the great military achievements of 
Oudenarde and Malplaquet, and the capture of Lille, 
Mons, and Minorca ; while the power of the Whigs 
rose to its zenith with the appointment of Somers as 
President of the Council. But, in their success, the 
Government became reckless. Louis XIV., now 
thoroughly alarmed, made handsome offers of peace ; 
but they were haughtily rejected by the Cabinet, 
except upon the terms that Louis should actively aid 
in deposing his own grandson from. the throne of 

10 



130 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

Spain. With the full support of his subjects, the 
French King refused the humiliating condition, and 
the costly war went on. Marlborough demanded to 
be made Captain-General for life of the British forces. 
He had twice refused the lucrative post of Governor 
of the Spanish Netherlands, offered him by the 
Emperor, for fear that the jealousy of the Allies 
should weaken their support. But, like many other 
men, he thought that his patriotism deserved a sub- 
stantial reward ; and the Captain-Generalship seemed 
to him to be only his due. The demand, however, 
raised a fierce outburst of anger in England. Men 
spoke openly of the new Cromwell ; and pertinently 
asked whether the Government regarded the war as a 
permanent institution. The Queen, now falling under 
the rival influence of Mrs. Masham, sternly refused 
the request. Finally, the Ministry made a disastrous 
mistake in directing the impeachment of Dr. 
Sacheverel, a divine accused of printing political 
sermons in which the principles of the Revolution 
were condemned. Walpole showed his sound sense 
by opposing the project in secret ; but he remained 
faithful to his party, and even took an active share in 
the impeachment. The issue fell out as he had fore- 
told. As the trial progressed, public feeling rose 
higher and higher. Sacheverel became the idol of 
the hour. The Queen let it be seen that she cordially 
disapproved of the action of her Ministers ; as the pro- 
ceedings went on, it became more and more difficult 
for the Government managers to avoid making use 
of arguments always unacceptable to the ears of 
authority, and hkely, unless handled with the strictest 



TRIAL OF SACHEVEREL I3I 

care, to recoil on the heads of those who used them. 
The whole organising machinery of the High Church 
party was brought to bear in favour of the accused. 
Ultimately, Sacheverel was found guilty by a majority 
of 17 in the House of Lords ; but the verdict was 
reduced to an absurdity by the lightness of the sen- 
tence pronounced upon him, which was merely that 
one of his offending sermons should be burnt in 
the presence of the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs, and 
that he should be suspended from preaching for three 
years. Such a sentence was virtually an acquittal, 
and was treated as such. The country went wild 
with delight. The Queen, emboldened by the 
unpopularity of the Ministers, offered the staff and 
key of the Lord Chamberlain to Shrewsbury, who, 
though a Whig, had voted in favour of Sacheverel's 
acquittal. But the manner of the appointment was 
more important than its matter. Godolphin and his 
colleagues knew nothing of the step till it was 
virtually taken. The Queen had, in fact, as was said 
at the beginning of the last chapter, exercised her 
undoubted right of appealing from her Ministers to 
the country. Emboldened by her success, she then, in 
spite of the earnest remonstrances of Godolphin and 
Marlborough, dismissed Sunderland from the secre- 
taryship of State, and appointed Lord Dartmouth, 
a High Church Tory, in his place. A month later, 
in August, 1710, a clean sweep was made, Godolphin, 
Somers, Cowper,i Devonshire, Wharton, and Derby 
being replaced by Harley, Rochester, Harcourt, 

' The Queen endeavoured to induce Cowper to remain in office, but 
he steadily refused. 



132 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

Buckingham, Ormond, and Berkeley, while St. John 
was made Secretary of State in the place of Robert 
Boyle. The new Ministers demanded a dissolution ; 
and the event proved that the Queen had rightly 
judged the temper of the nation. The Tories returned 
with a strong majority, which they at once improved 
by procuring the rejection of all Whigs whose elec- 
tions could be disputed. For the second time Walpole 
had shown his sound sense by suggesting, at the 
commencement of these changes, an united resigna- 
tion of the Ministry ; but, when his advice was 
neglected, he again proved his loyalty to his party 
by obstinately refusing the advances of Harley, who 
made the most flattering offers to win him over. By 
this conduct he incurred the deep resentment of the 
new Ministers, who revenged themselves by getting 
him condemned on a charge of corruption. The 
incident, however, in no way detracted from 
Walpole's reputation, being regarded as a pure piece 
of party spite. 

The history of the Tory Cabinet of 17 10 almost 
exactly repeated the history of its predecessor. 
Elated by their victory, rendered popular by the 
attempted assassination of Harley, and later by the 
conclusion of the Peace of Utrecht, fired by the 
enthusiastic support of the High Church party, the 
Ministers boldly launched upon a career of reaction 
and revenge. Marlborough, despite his great services, 
was accused of peculation, and abruptly dismissed 
from his offices, with every circumstance of ignominy. 
The Occasional Conformity Bill (p. 105) was at length 
passed. The mischievous measure which restored 




HENRY ST. JOHN (BOLINGBROKE) (1678-1751). 
Portrait by Sir Godfrey Kneller. 



134 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

private patronage in Scotland became law. The 
growing strength of the Press was crushed by a 
Stamp Act, and the iniquitous Schism Act of 17 14 
riveted still firmer the fetters of the Nonconformists, 
by placing the whole of the education of the country 
in the hands of the bishops.^ The one great achieve- 
ment of the Ministry, the Peace of Utrecht, was 
stained by circumstances of treachery, and by an 
extreme, if justifiable, stretch of the prerogative. The 
negotiations were carried on behind the backs of the 
Allies, and the English troops in the field were com- 
pelled, to their great indignation, to practise some- 
thing like actual treachery towards their comrades. 
To secure a majority in the Lords, the Queen was 
induced to create a batch of twelve new peers. 
Finally, the Ministers, or at least some of them, 
entered into negotiations with the Pretender, to upset 
the arrangements of the Act of Settlement. But the 
country was not prepared for such a step. The 
General Election of 17 13, in which the Whigs made 
considerable gains, had already weakened the Govern- 
ment. It was followed by an open rupture between 
Harley and St. John ; and, though the superior 
abilities of the latter enabled him to procure the dis- 
missal of his rival, the vacant post was, in the con- 
fusion attendant upon the dying hours of the Queen, 
conferred upon the Duke of Shrewsbury, in whose 
hands the Protestant succession was safe. When the 



^ The Schism Act required, on pain of imprisonment, that every 
schoolmaster should obtain a licence from a bishop, should conform to 
the Anglican liturgy, and take the sacrament according to the rites of 
the Established Church. 



INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE 1 35 

paper on which, pursuant to the Act of Security 
(p. 1 14), the Elector of Hanover had written the names 
of his representatives, was opened, it was found to 
contain a great majority of Whig nominations. The 
elections which followed confirmed the choice of the 
new King, the Whigs securing a great majority. To 
avoid impeachment, Bolingbroke and Ormond fled 
over sea ; and the Tory party went into a political 
banishment of nearly half a century. 

The period which follows, dull as it proverbially 
is, and barren of startling events, is really of vital 
importance in the history of the British nation. In 
it were laid the foundations of that world-wide 
commerce, which is to-day the economic basis of 
the Empire's greatness. The East India Company, 
just a hundred years old, was quietly establishing 
itself as the great commercial power in the East, 
and preparing for the deadly struggle with Holland 
and France which the latter half of the century was 
to witness. British enterprise in the Western 
Hemisphere was undermining the already tottering 
power of Spain. The slow but sure development of 
the British colonies in North America was preparing 
the way for the gigantic duel with France for the 
possession of that great continent. The fiscal reforms 
of Walpole were making the British revenue system, 
despite its Protectionist character, the admiration of 
the world, and rendering the work of Adam Smith 
possible. In the potteries and ironworks of Stafford- 
shire, and the coal-mines of Northumberland, was 
maturing the humble seed of a vast industrial 
enterprise which, half a century later, was to shoot 



136 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

Up into such a mighty tree. The steady improve- 
ment in agriculture and other rural pursuits, en- 
couraged by an almost unbroken series of rich 
harvests, was building up a sturdy peasantry, 
which was afterwards to give its life-blood to feed 
the factory system of the North, and the armies 
which withstood Napoleon. The gradual healing 
of deep-seated divisions, religious and political, was 
welding the once divided country into a great 
national unity, and bringing into existence the hopes 
and endeavours that led to the great outburst of 
democratic feeling which produced the Reform Bill. 
Last, but not least, the dull political intrigues of 
those commonplace years were slowly moulding the 
administration of the State into that curious form, 
which was the answer of history to a struggle which 
had been the secret mainspring of English political 
life for nearly four hundred years — the attempt to 
reconcile a strong government with popular control. 
What the Civil War, with its heroes and its blood- 
shed, had been unable to effect, that the reigns of 
two foreign kings, with their petty Court intrigues 
and sordid politics, were destined to produce. It is 
to this aspect of the period that we turn our eyes. 

The first step in the process was the passing of the 
Septennial Act in 17 16. The ostensible cause of 
this measure was the excitement under which the 
country was labouring, after the Jacobite rising of the 
previous year, and the prosecutions which naturally 
followed. In spite of the defeat of Forster at 
Preston, and the flight of Mar from Sheriffmuir, the 
Government preferred to believe that the Pretender's 



THE SEPTENNIAL ACT 1 37 

agents were busily at work, and that an election in 
17 1 8 would be fatal to the peace of the country. But 
the real motiv^e of the measure was the enormous 
cost attendant upon securing a majority in the 
House of Commons under the triennial system. 
The expenses of elections had grown rapidly with 
the increased importance of the House of Commons ; 
and a member who had the prospect of a heavy 
drain upon his purse at the end of three years 
naturally asked a higher subsidy than one who 
could count upon a longer tenure of his seat. The 
Bill was, of course, furiously opposed by the Jacobites, 
as well as by the loyal Tories, who hoped for a 
change in the balance of the parties. Some of the 
independent Whigs were also a good deal troubled 
by the constitutional argument, that a House returned 
by the electors for a period of three years could not 
legally prolong its own existence to seven. But it 
was pointed out, with considerable force, that a 
simple repeal of the Triennial Act, which had not 
been in existence for a quarter of a century, was 
unquestionably within the power of Parliament, and 
that such a step would really leave it in the power 
of the Crown to prolong the existence of the House 
for an indefinite period. Moreover, the Commons 
could not help feeling that the new measure would 
give them an immense accession of strength in 
their rivalry with the Lords. Ultimately, the Bill 
passed its second reading in the Lower House by a 
majority of 122 ; and it is significant of the state 
of politics that, of the 284 members who voted in 
the majority on that occasion, no less than 129 held 



138 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

office under the Crown. Curiously enough, Walpole, 
though he was known to be strongly in favour of 
the measure, had no opportunity of speaking in its 
defence ; for, though he held the offices of First Lord 
of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
he was actually obliged, by a serious illness, to 
absent himself from the sittings of the House. 

A few months later he was compelled to resign 
office for opposing the view of Stanhope, who, for 
the first few years of the new reign, acted as Prime 
Minister ; and he cannot, therefore, be credited with 
the authorship of the next important step in the 
progress of the new system. This was the suspension 
of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, 
which, according to ancient precedent, assembled 
in London at the opening of each session of 
Parliament, and, though by no means equal in 
importance with the General Assembly of the 
Scottish Kirk, yet held it in its power to act as a 
thorn in the side of a Parliament to whose views it 
was opposed. The Upper House of Convocation, 
consisting of the bishops, was at this time steadily 
Whig, despite Anne's creations. But the Lower 
House, consisting of the deans and archdeacons, 
together with a large number of proctors, or elected 
representatives of the minor clergy, faithfully reflected 
the Tory sympathies of the Church, and served as 
a rallying-point for the Opposition. At the Refor- 
mation, however, it had been solemnly acknowledged ^ 
that the Convocations could not meet without the 

' 25 Henry VIII. c. 17. 



CONVOCATION SUSPENDED 1 39 

sanction of the King's writ; and, in the year 171 7, 
the Government took the step of withholding the 
necessary formality — an act which commenced the 
virtual suspension of the independent existence of 
the Church for a period of 130 years, and thus 
deprived the Opposition of a formidable weapon. 

But, at the next constitutional crisis, the voice of 
Walpole is already heard. In 17 19 the Ministers, 
serenely confident in their majority in the Lords, 
and dreading a possible disturbance of the balance, 
brought in a Bill to restrict the future creation of 
peers. The numbers of the English peerage were 
never to be increased beyond six. On the falling-in of 
vacancies, patents were to be made out only in favour 
of heirs male. The sixteen elected peers of Scotland 
were to be replaced by twenty-five hereditary peers. 
The Bill appealed to the exclusive feeling of the 
House of Lords ; but calm observers saw that it 
would, if carried, be fatal, both to the supremacy 
of the House of Commons, and to the Ministerial 
system. An hereditary Chamber is always slow to 
respond to the changes of national feeling. A close 
hereditary Chamber is certain to get out of touch 
with national life. Walpole, though not, technically, 
in Opposition, acted the part of candid friend, and 
threw his whole weight against the Bill. But it is 
noteworthy, that the most telling argument in his 
powerful speech which, practically, decided the fate 
of the measure, was not any appeal to general 
principle. He asked, pointedly, whether the Whig 
country gentlemen and merchants would really 
consent to a scheme which would deprive them 



I40 THE SYSTEM OF W A LP OLE 

and their children for ever of the honourable 
ambition of ranking among the peers of the realm. 
The argument was irresistible. The independent 
Whigs came over in a body ; and the supporters of 
the Government were beaten by nearly a hundred 
votes. The result was to confirm Walpole's ascen- 
dency in the House, and to convince Ministers of the 
folly of excluding from their ranks the one man who 
could assure success to their measures. Walpole 
became once more Paymaster of the Forces in 
1720. 

There followed, almost immediately, an event 
which raised him to the highest pinnacle of 
influence. In 171 1 Harley had formed the South 
Sea Company as a rival of the Whig institution 
of the Bank of England. The company was 
nominally commercial ; but its real object was to 
aid the Tory Government, by taking over part of 
the floating National Debt, and converting it into 
permanent stock. The dividends were, of course, 
to be paid out of the national revenue, and this 
meant that the management, or, at least, the dis- 
tribution of national funds was handed over to 
the Directors. The plan had succeeded, for there 
was a vast amount of capital seeking permanent 
investment ; and the creditors of the Government 
had no wish to be paid off. But the jealousy felt 
by the Company for the Bank, and the party feeling 
involved, led the two institutions to enter upon a 
spirited rivalry for the assumption of future debts. 
The Directors of the Bank kept their heads ; but their 
rivals bid wildly for business, offering extravagant 



NATIONAL DEBT I4I 

advantages in return for the assignment of loans. At 
length, in 1720, they made an offer to take over 
thirty millions of the nation's liabilities, to reduce 
the interest payable by the State to an uniform rate 
of 4 per cent., to subscribe seven and a half 
millions for the public service, and to reduce sub- 
stantially the charges of management. In return 
for these magnificent offers, they asked only for the 
exclusive monopoly of the visionary trade in Spanish 
waters, assumed to have been secured by the Treaty 
of Utrecht, but really rendered nugatory by the 
renewed hostility of Spain. 

In spite of the strong opposition of Walpole, the 
proposals of the Company were accepted by Parlia- 
ment, on the recommendation of Aislabie, who had 
succeeded him in the chancellorship of the Exchequer. 
It was manifest, however, that the Company could 
only carry out its promises with the help of an 
enormous inflation of prices ; and, to the disgust of 
its supporters, the expected rise of the price of 
stock did not at first take place. In their despair, 
the Directors, it is to be feared with the connivance 
of the Government, resorted to every art then 
invented for producing what would now be called 
a " boom." Amongst other rumours, it was announced 
that the Spaniards had consented to take Gibraltar 
and Minorca in exchange for some places in Peru, 
a country then popularly supposed to consist exclu- 
sively of gold and silver. The announcement raised 
the price of stock to 200 per cent, premium, at which 
price two millions of the original issue were disposed 
of An immediate dividend of 10 per cent, was 



142 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

promised on the 21st of April, and a second sub- 
scription was negotiated at 300 premium. Tempted 
by the bait, the holders of Government annuities 
exchanged them for stock of the Company on 
absurdly liberal terms, some even accepting a 
nominal eight and a half years' purchase. The 
fever of speculation attacked the nation. By the 
end of May the ;^ioo stock had risen to 890 ; before 
the end of June it touched 1,000, and, even at that price, 
purchasers were willing to take over subscriptions 
at the enormous premium of 2,000 per cent. Nor 
was the fever by any means confined to South Sea 
stock. The summer of 1720 witnessed the first and 
greatest outburst of mad speculation from which the 
country has suffered. Companies were formed for 
every conceivable object — for assuring seamen's 
wages, for effectually settling the islands of Blanco 
and Sal-Tartugas, for a wheel for perpetual motion, 
for erecting an hospital to maintain bastard children, 
for buying and fitting out ships to suppress pirates, 
for the transmutation of quicksilver into a malleable 
fine metal, for erecting salt-pans in Holy Island, for 
carrying an undertaking of great advantage, but 
nobody to know what it is. The state of the public 
mind is best shown by the fact that the promoter 
of the last ingenious scheme collected two thousand 
guineas from a thousand different persons in a 
single morning : after which, needless to say, he 
decamped. The South Sea Directors somewhat 
foolishly obtained from the Lords Justices, who 
represented the King in his absence at Hanover, 
an order for the suppression of many of these 



SOUTH SEA BUBBLE 1 43 

wildcat companies ; and the irritation thus produced 
threatened to prick the South Sea Bubble itself. 
But by dint of unscrupulous manoeuvres the 
Directors succeeded, at the end of August, in placing 
yet another million of their capital at a premium of 
i,ooo per cent. 

The crash came in September, owing to the succes- 
sive failures of the bankers who had lent money on 
South Sea stock, and found themselves unable to 
realise. With unanimous voice the nation called 
for Walpole, who had steadily refused to take any 
part in public affairs during the preceding three 
months, to come to its rescue. With great difficulty 
he succeeded in inducing the Bank of England to 
take over a part of the Company's liabilities on 
reasonable terms. The Government agreed to 
accept, in stock of the Company, one half of the 
seven and a half millions due to it, and to abate 
the other. The estates of the Directors were con- 
fiscated to satisfy the claims of stock-holders, who 
ultimately received back a small proportion of their 
losses. After a long investigation by the House of 
Commons, several of the Directors were sent to the 
Tower; and more than one committed suicide. 
Stanhope, the Prime Minister, though he was 
personally innocent of corruption, was so overcome 
by the revelations affecting his colleagues, that he 
fell ill and died. There was but one man possible as 
his successor, and that man was, of course, Walpole. 
He was made First Lord of the Treasury and 
Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1721, his brother- 
in-law Townshend returning to office with him a? 



144 '^HE SYSTEM OF \V ALP OLE 

Secretary of State. All men felt, however, that it 
was Walpole's Government ; and from that day until 
1742 Walpole was virtually ruler of England. 
Incidentally, it may be remarked, the South Sea 
Bubble had brought him two valuable prizes beyond 
the premiership. In the early stages of the mania 
he had acted as the financial adviser of Princess 
Caroline, the wife of the future George II., and acted 
so wisely, that he secured her firm friendship, and 
commenced that curious alliance which was so 
valuable to him in later years. Moreover, having 
delivered his faithful testimony against the South 
Sea scheme, and seen his advice neglected, he had 
not scrupled to dabble in the stock on his own 
account, and to clear a profit of 1,000 per cent. 
on his transactions. The result was to raise him 
from the position of an ordinary country gentleman 
to that of a nobleman with a great estate. 

Starting thus, with the fairest auspices, Walpole, 
as we have said, retained the reins of bffice for 
twenty-one years. What were the chief features 
of his remarkable success ? 

In the first place, he had the Court thoroughly in 
hand. It was inevitable that a king who, like 
George I., could speak no English, and knew nothing 
of English domestic policy, should be little more than 
a figurehead in home affairs. Thinking it useless to 
listen to discussions in a tongue which he did not 
understand, George absented himself from Cabinet 
meetings, and therefore knew nothing of current 
business. Thus the personal authority of William, 
and the wavering attitude of Anne, were changed, 



walpole's ascendency at court 145 

necessarily, for the blind acceptance by George of the 
advice of his chief Minister. Who that Minister 
should be was the all-important point. We have 
seen that the state of affairs on the death of Anne 
rendered it impossible for the King to trust a Tory. 
At first, as we have also seen, he inclined to Stan- 
hope, who was a soldier, and who humoured him 
about Hanoverian politics. But, after the South Sea 
Bubble, he clung firmly to Walpole, who, in his own 
words, could " turn stones into gold," ^ and who had 
earned his undying gratitude by the masterly way 
in which he had screened the Court from the awkward 
revelations of the South Sea Committee. Once only 
was Wal pole's power in serious danger from the 
Court, when, on the sudden death of George L, his 
son, who disliked Walpole for his steady devotion 
to the dead monarch's family views, expressed his 
intention of making Compton his chief Minister. 
But Compton was so incapable of seizing his chance, 
that he actually applied to Walpole for assistance in 
drawing up the new King's first speech to the Privy 
Council. A foolish man would have refused with 
petulance. Walpole readily consented, and took care 
that his handwriting should appear in the draft sub- 
mitted to the King. Then the new Queen, no other 
than that Princess Caroline who had made a fortune 
through Walpole's advice at the time of the South 
Sea Bubble, pointed out to her husband the absurdity 
of employing a Minister who could not perform his 
simplest duties without assistance from his rival. The 

^ Presumably the King used the German equivalent. 
II 



146 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

King was reluctantly convinced, and Walpole was 
sent for. He clenched his victory by undertaking to 
secure for the King a Civil List substantially larger 
than anything that Compton had dared to propose, 
and made good his promise. He was immediately 
confirmed in his old office ; and the King loyally 
placed at his disposal the vast patronage of the 
Crown. Only one reservation was made. " As for 
your scoundrels of the House of Commons," His 
Majesty was pleased to observe, " you may do what 
you please, but I will have no interference with my 
army." The stipulation was just, and Walpole 
accepted it. Even the death of Walpole's faithful 
ally. Queen Caroline, in 1737, made no difference. 
Walpole transferred his friendship to the King's 
mistress, Madame de Walmoden, and held the Court 
as securely as before. Envious rivals poured tales of 
scandal into the King's ear. George listened and 
laughed, and repeated them to Walpole himself To 
the day of his defeat, in 1742, and even after it, 
Walpole retained the unbroken confidence of the 
King. 

Equally clear in Walpole's system was his deter- 
mination to make the House of Commons the real 
centre of political business. He was the first leading 
Minister since the Restoration who steadily refused a 
peerage during the whole of his tenure of office. 
Clarendon, Danby, the Sunderlands, Halifax, Roches- 
ter, Godolphin, Oxford, Bolingbroke, and Stanhope, 
had all conducted the business of the country from 
the Painted Chamber. Even Montagu, though his 
influence was great, and though, in many respects. 



HIS FINANCIAL MEASURES 1 4/ 

he anticipated the position of Walpole, had been 
overshadowed by Somers and Wharton, both of them 
peers. But Walpole, whose Cabinets bristled with 
noble lords, was always indisputably First Minister, 
just because he, and he alone, could lead the House 
of Commons. So long as he could command a 
majority in that House, he cared not a rap for the 
intrigues of his colleagues in Court and Cabinet. The 
moment he was beaten in the Commons he resigned 
all his offices. In his hands the spigot of taxation 
became the rudder of government ; and it was just 
during his long period of power that the Commons 
finally achieved the supreme control in matters of 
finance. Before his day, the chancellorship of the 
Exchequer, historically a subordinate post, had often 
been held by a peer. Walpole not only raised it to 
the position of a great office of State, but set the 
tradition, never afterwards broken, that it must be 
held by a member of the Commons' House.^ Almost 
the only measures of first-rate importance brought 
forward during his lease of power were financial 
measures. The import duties on timber were 
repealed ; and the worst restrictions imposed by 
the Navigation Acts judiciously withdrawn, to the 
great benefit of the colonial trade. The valuable 
silk manufactures of Spitalfields were encouraged 
by the allowance of drawbacks on exported silks. 
Smuggling was checked by a reduction to order 

' It is strictly true that Lord Mansfield, on two occasions, in 1757 
and 1767, held the Exchequer seal for a few months. But his position 
was purely pro fon)ia^ during the intervals between genuine 
appointments. 



148 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

and simplicity of the complicated chaos of the 
Customs' duties. The salt tax was abolished, to 
the great improvement of the health of the nation. 
The famous Excise Bill of 1733, though it raised a 
storm of factious opposition which was fatal to its 
success, is now universally admitted to have been a 
wise measure.^ With a policy of this nature, the 
House of Commons necessarily became the centre 
of business, and the predominance which it then 
acquired has never since been lost. In fact, the 
drawback to Walpole's policy was, that it made the 
House of Commons too powerful, not only for the 
King and the peers, but for the nation. Secured in 
their seats by the Septennial Act, supreme in Parlia- 
ment through the increasing importance of finance, 
unapproachable by intelligent criticism owing to the 
weakness of the Press and the secrecy of debates, the 
Commons succumbed to the evils of irresponsible 
power, and gradually assumed that position of 
arrogant privilege which was afterwards to cost 
them dear. 

Concerning the methods by which Walpole retained 
his hold over the body which he had made so power- 
ful, there has been much keen dispute. Due weight 
must be given to natural causes —to the determina- 
tion of the moneyed interest to maintain the 
Hanoverian dynasty, and to the conviction that 
Walpole was the man for the purpose. Quite apart 
from all questions of undue influence, Walpole exer- 
cised the authority natural to a man who had, over 

^ For an excellent summary of Walpole's financial policy, see A. L. 
Smith in " Social England," vol. v. pp. 1 17-130. 



HIS ASCENDENCY IN PARLIAMENT 1 49 

and over again, showed himself to be the incarnation 
of common sense, and who had rescued his country 
from the depths of financial despair. The mildness 
of his government won him friends amongst men who 
were tired of the furious polemics which had exhausted 
the energies of the previous generation. He could 
strike when he chose, as the rebels of 171 5 found to 
their cost. But his vindictiveness was, as a rule, 
reserved for traitors in his own camp ; and, even in 
such cases, it took what was then regarded as the 
lenient form of political ostracism. The well-known 
anecdote of his treatment of his rival Pulteney, whom, 
at the moment of the latter's triumph, he persuaded 
to commit the folly of accepting a peerage, is 
characteristic alike of his humour, and of his con- 
viction that the real power in politics lay with 
the Commons. " 1 have turned the key of the 
closet on him," he chuckled in triumph ; and he met 
his discomfited rival on the floor of the Upper House 
with the cheerful remark, " Well, here we are, my 
Lord, two of the least important men in England." To 
his open foes, Walpole was generous beyond anything 
hitherto known. He allowed the proceedings against 
Oxford to drop ; he consented to Bolingbroke's 
return to England ; and not all the venom of the 
Craftsman could move him to shed blood. Over 
and over again he spared Jacobites who had brought 
themselves within the scope of the treason laws ; and 
he had his reward when, in the crisis of 174 1, Shippen, 
the Jacobite leader, with thirty-four of his followers, 
refused to vote against the tottering Minister, and 
thereby prolonged his power for a year. That he 



150 THE SYSTEM OF W A LP OLE 

resorted to other and less honourable means to 
ensure his ascendency is probably true, although, 
from the nature of things, the evidence does not 
survive in a direct form.^ But it is quite certain, 
that parliamentary corruption did not originate 
with Walpole, neither did it reach its zenith 
in his time. For the most flagrant examples of 
individual corruption, we must go back to the days 
of Charles II. and William III. ; for the most reckless 
system of universal jobbery, we must look forward to 
the days of George III. When Walpole bribed, he 
bribed judiciously, and to secure what he believed 
(and with reason) to be a great national object, 
the maintenance of the Hanoverian dynasty on the 
throne. His evil reputation is, probably, quite as 
much due to his outspoken bluntness and freedom 
from cant, as to any real moral obliquity. 

Finally, if Walpole was not personally vindictive, 
he was a strict disciplinarian ; so strict, in fact, that 
he has been accused of violating the ethics of party 
allegiance, to gratify his personal ambition. But 
there was much excuse for him. He came into 
power at a time when political morality was 
notoriously low. It was, as yet, no uncommon 
thing for the members of a Ministry to conspire 
secretly against the measures of the Cabinet, and 
even to oppose them openly in Parliament Walpole 
believed, rightly or wrongly, that the peace of the 

' Walpole himself is said to have admitted in the House of Commons 
in 1 73 1, in opposing a motion for a return of pensions held by members 
of the House, that a measure of the kind proposed " would disfurnish 
half the counties and boroughs in England of their representatives " 
(Pari. Hist. viii. 857). 



A DISCIPLINARIAN I5I 

country was in danger from the Jacobites, and that 
the only way to meet the danger was by presenting 
an unbroken Ministerial front to the enemy. And, 
after all, no one could dispute that, after 1721, 
Walpole, and not Townshend or Carteret, was the 
choice of the nation. Carteret was a brilliant and 
wayward genius, whose subsequent career amply 
justified the prudence of Walpole in depriving him 
of the Seals in 1723. With Townshend, Walpole 
worked amicably for nine years ; and it was natural 
that the older man, originally the patron, should 
retire on finding himself reduced, by the logic of 
events, to a second place. 

But it was not in the Cabinet, so much as in the House 
of Commons, that Walpole's discipline showed itself 
most clearly. It has been remarked as strange, that 
a Prime Minister who avowedly rested his power on 
the Commons, should so rarely have admitted com- 
moners to his Ministries. Walpole's first Cabinet 
was composed of ten peers and three commoners ; 
on the withdrawal of Carteret, Pelham, a commoner, 
became Secretary at War, but the Seals were given 
to the Duke of Newcastle. When Townshend with- 
drew in 1729, his place was taken by the Earl of 
Harrington, and Lord Wilmington became Privy 
Seal. When the Ministry was reconstituted in 1731, 
the Dukes of Dorset and Rutland appeared in the 
Cabinet ; and the sole representatives of the Com- 
mons were Walpole himself and Pelham. In 1733, 
Walpole for once departed from his rule, by appoint- 
ing Sir Charles Wager First Lord of the Admiralty 
with a seat in the Cabinet. But, in 1739, he once 



152 THE SYSTEM OF WALPOLE 

more followed his own precedent, Lord Hervey, 
raised to the House of Lords in his father's lifetime, 
being made Privy Seal. 

In truth, however, there is no mystery about the 
matter. Walpole felt that a colleague in the Upper 
House was far less dangerous than a colleague in the 
Lower. Secure in his own power of managing the 
Commons unaided, he dreaded the possible defection 
of a colleague in the hour of trial. His noble friends 
knew well enough that their tenure of office was 
dependent on his favour. He made a terrible sweep 
of them over the Excise Bill in 1733. Bolton and 
Clinton were deprived of their Lord Lieutenancies, 
Cobham of his regiment, Montrose of his guardian- 
ship of the Great Seal of Scotland, Chesterfield of his 
post of Lord Steward. Even Walpole dared not 
have treated influential members of the Lower House 
in that way. But Newcastle's increasing borough 
influence was steadily employed on behalf of the 
Government ; all the minor pickings of office were 
regularly given as rewards of political service ; again 
and again Walpole procured the defeat of Pension 
Bills that he might keep his battalions in good 
order. Even Lord Scarborough, a personal favourite 
of the King, and the holder of a purely formal office, 
had to resign because he could not agree with Wal- 
pole's high-handed action in the dismissal of Bolton 
and Cobham ; and his retirement maybe said to have 
definitely marked the adoption of the principle of 
the unity of the Cabinet. 

It is easy to exaggerate Walpole's contribution to 
the development of the new system ; and it is, indeed, 



IMPORTANCE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 1 53 

quite possible, that Walpole himself had no com- 
prehensive scheme of political organisation. He was 
above all things an opportunist, a man whose one 
object was, as we should now say, to carry on the 
business of the country from day to day. Neverthe- 
less, his long period of office marks the appearance 
of the new order. In place of the personal govern- 
ment of the Crown, limited it might be, by the 
restraints of law, and the necessity for winning the 
general sympathy of Parliament, he showed the 
country the picture of a simple commoner wielding 
more than royal power, by yirtue of the support of 
a well-drilled majority in the House of Commons, 
resting, nominally at the least, on a party organi- 
sation which extended throughout the kingdom. 
Walpole wielded more than royal power, because 
he had at his disposal, not merely the prerogative 
of the Crown, but the legislative and financial 
authority of Parliament. By his day it had at last 
come to be understood, that the one thing which 
could with certainty stop the wheels of administration 
was the refusal of the House of Commons to grant 
supplies. By making it his first care to secure a 
majority in that House, Walpole entrenched himself 
in an impregnable position. On the one hand, he 
could offer to the Crown and the Lords many good 
things, if they would fall in with his plans. On the 
other, he could practically checkmate them by 
refusing to ask for supplies. But he knew exactly 
the limits of his power, and, on his first defeat in the 
Commons, he admitted that his day had closed, and 
retired into private life. 



VI 



THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 



The period which came between the resignation of 
Walpole and the outbreak of the Seven Years' War is 
often reckoned the dullest in the annals of England. 
Even the long and pacific Ministry of Walpole 
appears interesting by comparison ; for, in the great 
figure of the Minister himself, the student, and even 
the casual reader, recognises a force which is shaping 
the course of history. But in the succeeding period 
no such clear mastery lends unity to the drama. The 
rising genius of Pitt does not find its real opportunity 
until the resignation of Newcastle in 1756. Mean- 
while, the stage is filled with the moderate talents 
of Pelham (the real successor of Walpole), the 
brilliant vagaries of Carteret, the cynical worldliness 
of Chesterfield, and the dull mediocrity of Newcastle. 
Even the stirring episodes of the Jacobite rising, and 
the capture of Arcot, fail to illumine the scene ; for 
the former is felt to be the last effort of a dying 
cause, and the significance of the latter is not recog- 
nised. The foreign politics of the time are tortuous 

154 



COLONIAL ENTERPRISE 155 

and confused ; there is nothing of the clear definite- 
ness of the issue for which Marlborough had fought, 
nor of that for which Pitt was going to fight. The 
Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle seems to mock the vast 
expenditure of blood and treasure, which had drained 
Europe for so many years, by restoring matters to 
the status quo ante. In domestic affairs, we seem 
to hear of nothing but Court intrigues and political 
factions, unrelieved by a single gleam of principle. 

Nevertheless, as in all. periods of our history, there 
were great principles and movements at work, if we 
could but find them. The task of national regenera- 
tion, ever needing new effort, was taken up by the 
fervent hearts of Wesley and his followers, who, in 
the year 1740, definitely formed the great society of 
Methodists. The steady progress of the English 
colonies in America was laying the foundations of 
a new world-power, whose ultimate influence is, even 
now, a matter of conjecture, but which, in this period, 
was not even dreamt of. The new activity of the 
English settlements in India was surely paving the 
way for that march to glory which, perhaps more than 
anything else, has given Britain her fame and influ- 
ence among the nations. In the year 1745, a sig- 
nificant motion by Sir Francis Dashwood, in favour 
of Parliamentary Reform, marks the definite 
appearance of the great Radical movement which 
was to dominate English politics in the following 
century. The voyages of Anson, and the explorations 
of Byron, Wallis, and Carteret, opened up the Pacific 
to British adventurers, and were the precursors of 
that brilliant period which added Australia and New 



156 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

Zealand to the British Empire. But, for our imme- 
diate purpose, the interest of the years from 1742 
to 1756 lies in the part which they contributed 
to the definite establishment of the Cabinet 
System. 

It would have been too much to expect that 
George IL, on the retirement of Walpole, should 
bow without an effort to an incipient tradition, which 
deprived him of personal authority, and the reality of 
which was hardly admitted, even by those who were 
most concerned in its maintenance. Accordingly, 
the King determined to replace the retiring statesman 
with a Minister of his own choosing ; and it is not a 
little significant, both of his tenacity and his want of 
imagination, that his choice should have fallen upon 
the very man whose ignominious failure in 1727 had 
secured Walpole's authority for a period of fifteen 
years. But Wilmington in 1742 was more successful 
than Compton had been in 1727, and he formed a 
Ministry which, in some of its features, looked like 
a return to the old order. Not only were some 
of Walpole's rivals, such as Carteret and Pulteney, 
admitted — that, of course, would appear to us more 
natural than the retention of his friends ; but the 
most characteristic features of his system were 
abandoned. Wilmington, the nominal Prime Minis- 
ter, was a peer, and had little influence in the House 
of Commons. Carteret, by far the ablest and most 
brilliant member of the Government, quarrelled 
openly with his colleagues, and conducted foreign 
affairs without reference to them. Pulteney (now 
Earl of Bath) held no office, though he was a member 



INCIPIENT REFORM I 57 

of the Cabinet. Even Tories, like Winchelsea,^ were 
once more admitted to office ; while the reconcilia- 
tion effected between the King and the Prince of 
Wales deprived the " Leicester House Party," which 
had long been the centre of Opposition, of its rallying- 
point. 

Still more significant of a reaction against the 
system of Walpole was the passing, in the summer of 
1742, of a Place Bill, or, as it was called (to distinguish 
it from more sweeping measures of a similar kind), a 
" Bill to exclude certain officers from being Members 
of the House of Commons." A measure of this charac- 
ter had long been a favourite proposal of Walpole's 
opponents, who contended, with considerable show 
of reason, that his system could only be maintained 
by official corruption. It was strongly urged that 
the provisions of the Act of 1705 {ante p. 116) were 
inadequate, as applying only to newly created offices. 
Many of those who, in the cold shade of Opposi- 
tion, had been the loudest advocates of the measure, 
now found some excuse for deserting their former 
opinion. But, in spite of their defections, the Bill was 
carried, and it excluded from the Lower House the 
Commissioners of the Irish revenue and of the navy 
and victualling offices, as well as the subordinate 
officials of the Treasury, the Exchequer, the Admiralty, 
the Pay Offices, and the offices of the Secretaries of 
State, and the numerous Commissioners of salt, 
stamps, appeals, wine licences, hackney coaches, and 
hawkers and pedlars. At this point, however, the 

^ He was a son of the famous Lord Nottingham, the Revolution 
statesman. 



158 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

reforming zeal of Parliament stopped ; and Pension 
and Place Bills of a more sweeping character were 
rejected, while the proposal to repeal the Septennial 
Act disappeared. 

And the death of Wilmington in 1743 speedily 
put an end, for the time at least, to the King's 
hopes of a purely departmental Ministry. The Earl 
of Bath (Pulteney), who had been the real soul of 
the opposition to Walpole, laying aside the role of 
disinterested patriotism which sat so ill upon him, 
now openly descended into the arena, and claimed the 
great office of First Lord of the Treasury. But the 
fatal consequences of his acceptance of a peerage at 
once manifested themselves, and, after a three days' 
struggle, he was obliged to retire in favour of Henry 
Pelham, to whom had fallen his position as leader 
of the Commons' House, and, therewith, the leadership 
of the Ministerial party. Pelham became, not only 
First Lord of the Treasury, but Chancellor of the 
Exchequer ; for Sandys, the only other commoner 
in the Cabinet, in a fit of pique, refused to serve under 
a man who had just been raised from the subordinate 
office of Paymaster. Thus Pelham stepped at once 
into the shoes of Walpole, who indeed was believed 
to have inspired the new arrangements from his 
retirement at Houghton. 

One thing only was now needed to restore the 
system of Walpole in its completeness. The presence 
of Carteret in the Cabinet was to the new leader, as 
it had been to his great predecessor twenty years 
before, a source of constant danger. Carteret, incom- 
parably the most brilliant and fertile of the Ministers 



I 




Photo by\ \Walker br" Cockerell. 

WILLIAM PULTENEY (BATH) (1682-I764). 

Portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



l6o THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

had thrown himself passionately into the whirlpool of 
Continental politics ; and, by his devotion to the 
interests of Hanover, no less than his familiarity with 
the native language of the King, was obtaining a 
dangerous hold over the mind of his royal master. 
Even before the death of Wilmington he had, 
by accompanying George through the Dettingen 
campaign, and thus becoming the sole channel of 
communication with the closet, been a source of 
anxiety to his colleagues. His hand is seen also in 
the open declaration of war with France which 
followed on Wilmington's death. But he was vain 
and careless, ostentatiously despising the minor arts 
of political management, content, in his own language, 
" to make Kings and Emperors, and to maintain the 
balance of Europe." It is quite possible that, in 
assenting to the elevation of Pelham, he thought 
that he could treat the new First Lord as he had 
treated Wilmington. He soon discovered his mis- 
take. At the end of the year 1743 he persuaded his 
colleagues, though with the utmost difificuity, into 
proposing that 16,000 of the King's Hanoverian 
troops should be taken into British pay ; and the 
necessary motion, though fiercely combated by the 
eloquence of Pitt and Chesterfield, passed through 
both Houses with substantial majorities. But Pelham 
and his adherents had become thoroughly alarmed 
by the reckless policy of their colleague, and deter- 
mined to get rid of him. The ill-success of the war, 
during the summer of 1744, afforded the necessary 
excuse. The Pelhams and their supporters drew up 
a memorial to the King, stating that they felt them- 



COMMONS AND CABINET l6l 

selves unable to carry on the government of the 
country with Carteret (who had just become Lord 
Granville) in his present office. The King was angry 
and sullen, Carteret indignant. But the matter was 
settled by the logic of events. Looking over the 
division lists in the House of Commons, Carteret 
found that his enemies could outvote him by four 
to one ; and he bowed to the inevitable. His place 
was taken by Lord Harrington ; and a few other 
changes were made. Of these the most important 
were the admission of Bedford and Gower, as repre- 
sentatives of that powerful section of the Whigs which 
was afterwards to become famous as the " Bloomsbury 
Gang," and the appointment to the Viceroyalty of 
Ireland, in spite of his action on the Hanoverian 
question, of the Earl of Chesterfield. 

The significance of the events of 1744 can hardly 
be questioned. There was no question of party ; it 
was simply a matter of discipline. The favourite 
Minister of the King refused 'to follow the lead of 
the man who commanded the support of the House 
of Commons and the Cabinet, and, in spite of the 
King's support and his own transcendent abilities, 
the recalcitrant Minister was forced to resign. It is 
said that, in the agony of the crisis, Carteret appealed 
successfully for the help of the veteran of Houghton ; 
and if this be so, it is easy to understand Horace 
Walpole's otherwise unaccountable attitude on the 
occasion. The owner of Strawberry Hill affects to 
be deeply indignant at conduct which his father had 
practised over and over again, and which, according 
to the principles of the Walpolean system, was 

12 



1 62 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

thoroughly constitutional. George himself was far 
more docile. Not only was he compelled to accept 
as Ministers, and even as household servants, men 
who, like Sir John Cotton and Waller, were personally 
distasteful to him ; but he was obliged to submit to 
a lecture from the Chancellor, Lord Hardwicke, in 
which it was explained to him that he must act as 
though all these events had been the result of his 
dearest wishes. The poor King," not unnaturally, 
found the lesson'hard to learn ; and when Hardwicke, 
with remorseless logic, wound up his harangue with 
the orthodox profession, that he and his colleagues 
were but the humble servants of His Majesty, the 
persecuted monarch burst out with the bitter 
confession, " Ministers are the King in this country." 
The long administration of Pelham is second only 
to that of Walpole in its importance for our purpose ; 
but it is singularly deficient in incident. The absence 
of all popular enthusiasm on behalf of the Govern- 
ment was strikingly manifested by the indifference 
with which the Jacobite rising of 1745 was received. 
The Pretender, encouraged by the defeat of the 
English and their allies at Fontenoy, landed in the 
Highlands in July, reached Edinburgh in safety, and 
was actually proclaimed King in the Scottish capital. 
Defeating Cope, the English commander, at Preston- 
pans, he dashed across the English border, captured 
Carlisle, and reached Derby by the beginning of 
December. But if there was little enthusiasm for 
the Government, there was even less, in England 
at least, for the Stuarts. Thoroughly alarmed, the 
Ministers hurried troops home from the Low 



ADMISSION OF PITT TO OFFICE 1 63 

Countries ; but, even after his northward retreat, the 
Pretender was able to claim another victory at 
Falkirk. In April, however, his dwindling host 
was defeated at Culloden, near Inverness, and the 
rising stamped out with a merciless severity which 
obtained for the victor the title of " Butcher Cum- 
berland." Even before Culloden a ministerial crisis 
had occurred. Alarmed by their own weakness, the 
Ministers proposed to the King to take Pitt into 
office. The proposal was, according to modern ideas, 
thoroughly sound ; for, though Pitt was nominally in 
Opposition (as were most aspiring members who were 
not on the Ministerial pay list), his views were almost 
entirely in accord with those of the Pelhams, and he 
was rapidly rising into power as the most brilliant 
debater in the House. But the King, who hated 
Pitt for his outspokenness on Hanoverian questions, 
flatly refused to adopt the suggestion, and began to 
listen to Bath and Granville. Acting with unusual 
promptitude, the Ministry resigned in a body ; and, 
after a futile attempt by Bath and Granville to form 
a Cabinet, the King was reluctantly compelled to 
submit to the demands of his former Ministers. Pitt 
was made Vice-Treasurer of Ireland and, subsequently. 
Paymaster of the Forces ; but the feelings of the 
King were still strong enough to keep him out of 
the Cabinet. The new Minister, however, added 
considerable strength to the Government, and gained 
great popularity for himself by refusing to accept the 
irregular profits of the Pay Office. But, while he thus 
established a reputation for financial honesty, he took 
less care of his political consistency ; for he soon 



164 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

became a strenuous supporter of that Hanoverian 
policy which it had once been his chief object to 
assail. 

The accession of Pitt to office marks, in fact, the 
beginning of that long period of war which contrasts 
so strongly with the period of peace under his great 
predecessor Walpole. It is, perhaps, hardly more 
than an accident that Pitt should have been bred to 
the profession of arms. He resigned that profession 
lightly, rather than risk his chances in the career of 
politics. But the whole temper of the man, his 
virtues as well as his failings, led him in the direction 
of a warlike policy. Intensely proud of his country's 
fame, he could not bear to see her suing for peace at 
the courts of Europe, or striving to avert war by 
diplomatic caution. Almost unerring in his judg- 
ment of individual character, he felt confident of 
being able to select the right men to conduct a war 
to a brilliant conclusion. Wielding the magnetic 
charm of eloquence, he knew that he could always 
rouse both the House and the country to those great 
and sudden efforts which war requires. On the other 
hand, he had no taste for the subterranean workings 
of party management, and no love for the drudgery 
of administrative office. Of finance and political 
economy he knew very little ; and the slow develop- 
ment of the material resources of the country seemed 
to him an unworthy task for a great Minister. But 
he was invaluable to his colleagues, as the one man 
in their ranks who could bring them into touch with 
the world beyond the narrow sphere of Court and 
politics. The stroke of genius by which, after the 



PEACE OF AIX-LA-CHAPELLE 1 65 

ruthless victory of Culloden, he converted the most 
dangerous of the Highlanders into loyal servants of 
the Crown, by enrolling them in the army and 
allowing them to wear that national dress which was 
elsewhere proscribed, is proof of an imagination 
wholly different from the sordid policy of Newcastle 
and his crew. The great Militia Act of 1757 was but 
another sign of the same spirit. 

For some years, however, while Pitt occupied only 
minor office, the military fortunes of the country were 
not brilliant. The terrible defeat of the Duke of 
Cumberland at Bergen-op-Zoom, in 1747, was followed 
by the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, by which, as it 
seemed, all the blood and treasure poured out like 
water during nine years of devastating war were 
recklessly thrown away. France, the really victorious 
Power, restored Maestricht and Bergen to Holland, 
Madras to England, and Savoy and Nice to Sardinia, 
engaged not to rebuild the fortifications of Dunkirk, 
and finally renounced the Stuart claims. On the 
other hand, however, England gave up Cape Breton, 
and silently acquiesced in the Spanish right of search, 
upon which the war had nominally been commenced. 
The real profit of the treaty fell to Austria, whose 
candidate for the Empire was confirmed, and whose 
Queen, Maria Theresa, at last obtained the acceptance 
by Europe of that Pragmatic Sanction, by which the 
hereditary domains of her father had been secured to 
the female line. 

The remainder of Pelham's political career was 
rendered still more tranquil by the deaths, in 175 1, of 
the Prince of Wales and Lord Bolingbroke ; and 



1 66 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

though the eye of the Great Commoner must have 
lighted up as he heard the news from India of Clive's 
brilHant capture and defence of Arcot, his victories 
over Raja Sahib, and the taking of Trichinopoly, 
Covelong, and Chingleput, these great events seem 
to have made Httle impression on the country. 
In 1754 Pelham died suddenly ; and Pitt, disgusted 
at being passed over for nonentities like Legge, who 
was made Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Sir 
Thomas Robinson, who became Secretary of State 
and Leader of the Commons, found an opportunity 
of resigning office in the following year, leaving the 
government of Newcastle to welter in inglorious 
mediocrity. 

But Pitt had not now long to wait. During the life- 
time of his brother (Pelham) Newcastle had failed to 
see why he, the owner of many pocket boroughs and an 
income which enabled him to buy the costly luxury of 
support, should be reckoned inferior in political impor- 
tance to his junior in the House of Commons. Now he 
discovered how hard it was for a First Minister in the 
Lords to control the Lower House through a nonentity 
at whom every one laughed, and whom Newcastle 
himself did not entrust with the important secrets of 
" management." He had lost the powerful support 
of Henry P'ox in 1754, by his obstinate refusal to 
make him a confidant in this delicate matter; 
for Fox very justly explained that he could not 
possibly manage the House of Commons, unless he 
knew who was being bribed and to what extent. 
Now (1755) Newcastle thought better of it, and 
induced Fox to accept the office of Secretary of 







Copyright^ \_Sir Benjaini?i Stone. 

STATUE OF LORD CHATHAM (1708-I778) IN ST. STEPHEN'S HALL, 

WESTMINSTER. 

By D. Macdowell, R.A. 



1 68 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

State, poor Sir Thomas Robinson being quietly 
shelved. But he was still resolutely bent on ex- 
cluding Pitt, of whom he was honestly afraid, with 
all the terror of a little mind for a great one. 
Meanwhile, however, the Cabinet drifted irreso- 
lutely into another war with France ; and it soon 
became clear that Pitt was the one man for the 
situation. He strengthened himself by a close 
alliance with the Princess of Wales, thus saving the 
Leicester House party, and by a marriage with Lady 
Hester Temple, whose brother, Earl Temple, a man 
of vast wealth and influence, thenceforth became his 
firm supporter. In Lord Anson, the head of the 
Admiralty, he found a warm adherent. His terms 
gradually rose. Formerly he would have been 
content with a seat in the Cabinet ; now he demanded 
the leadership of the House of Commons. The 
Government went from bad to worse. At the end of 
1755 came the terrible news of the destruction of 
Braddock's forces at Fort Duquesne. At the begin- 
ning of 1756, the nation was cheered by the news of 
a treaty with Prussia ; but Frederick, the Prussian 
King, was one of the best-hated men in Europe, and 
the alliance was instantly threatened by a league 
between Austria, Russia, and Saxony, while it seemed 
only too probable that France would join the coali- 
tion. Byng failed to relieve Minorca. A French 
invasion was feared, and the national pride received 
a severe blow by the spectacle of Hessian and 
Hanoverian troops, hastily brought over to defend 
the shores of Britain. Finally, in the autumn of 
1756, came the news of the capture of Calcutta 




(I7II-I779-) 



I/O THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

by Surajah Dowlah, and the deliberate murder of 
123 English prisoners in the Black Hole. It was 
a time at which, if ever, England stood in need 
of her best men ; and with one voice the country 
called for Pitt. 

But Pitt was determined not to place himself again 
in a false position. He flatly refused to serve under 
Newcastle, or to accept anything less than a Secretary- 
ship of State with the leadership of the Commons. 
Further than this, he determined to secure places in 
the Cabinet for a number of his personal friends, 
sufficient to enable him to speak with weight at the 
Council Board as well as in the House. He named 
his brother-in-law Temple, George Grenville, and 
Legge. It is more than probable that Newcastle 
had, for purposes of his own, exaggerated the King's 
dislike of Pitt ; but the monarch was staggered by 
these audacious proposals, and Newcastle once more 
had hopes. At the critical moment, however. Chief 
Justice Ryder died ; and his place was claimed by 
William Murray, afterwards the great Lord Mansfield, 
next to Fox incomparably the ablest supporter of the 
Newcastle government in the House of Commons. 
Finally, Fox also tendered his resignation, and the 
King was obliged to give way. To break the abrupt- 
ness of the blow, however, the Duke of Devonshire, a 
great Whig potentate of considerable ability, was 
asked to fill the office of First Lord of the Treasury ; 
and he, with some reluctance, consented. Pitt's 
nominations were accepted, and the new Ministry 
began its work in the autumn of 1756. 

But trouble soon appeared. The forces of Opposi- 



THE NEED OF REFORM I7I 

tion were strong ; for, though Pitt was undoubtedly 
the choice of the country, it was far from certain that 
he was the choice of Parliament. It must never be 
forgotten that, until the Reform Act of 1832, the 
House of Commons but faintly represented the feelings 
of the nation. The very success of the new system 
had contributed powerfully to this result. The 
extreme value of a Parliamentary seat had caused the 
control of elections to be eagerly coveted by aspiring 
politicians. The county representation was still fairly 
open ; for the continued fall in the value of money was 
steadily extending the area of the forty-shilling 
franchise. But the inequalities and anomalies of the 
municipal system had rendered the boroughs an easy 
prey to the speculator. The changing condition of 
industry had reduced towns once populous to the, 
level of mere villages, in which all the influence was 
easily acquired by unscrupulous bribery, while the 
rapid growth of population in other centres had not 
brought about political representation. The royal 
prerogative of summoning fresh boroughs, though 
never formally abolished, had, by tacit consent of all 
parties, fallen into abeyance before the end of the 
seventeenth century.^ Secrecy of debate in Parlia- 
ment, once necessary in the interests of independence, 
was now jealously maintained in the interests of 
corruption. It did not suit honourable members that 
their constituents, and the country at large, should 
know what was said or done in Parliament. Even 
the printing of the voting lists was watched with great 

^ The last example of its exercise is said to have been the case of 
Newark, in 1673. 



1/2 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

jealousy, and only occasionally permitted. For nearly 
a quarter of a century, Newcastle and his friends had 
been amassing Parliamentary influence ; and they 
used it unscrupulously against the new Ministry. 
Pitt's power in the House was different from that of 
Walpole or Pelham, It was great in Opposition ; for 
many of the Government nominees, not wholly given 
over to corrupt influences, shrank from incurring the 
withering force of his satire, or the thunder of his 
denunciations. But Pitt had none of those arts of 
management which Walpole and the Pelhams used 
with such effect. He ostentatiously despised the 
details of administration, which, to the average 
politician, are the supreme interest of life. Moreover, 
although, as has been said, the King's dislike of him 
was probably exaggerated by Newcastle, yet it was at 
this time very real. George had not forgotten the 
scornful references to Hanover ; and he looked with 
deep suspicion on the connection between Pitt and 
Leicester House. Finally, even with the country Pitt 
for a time lost popularity, by his generous protection 
of Byng, whom the Admiralty desired to offer up as 
a scapegoat for the failure at Minorca. The three 
influences* were too much for him ; and his enemies 
were not slow to take advantage of their opportunity. 
In less than six months Pitt and Temple were 
abruptly dismissed from office ; and it seemed as 
though the power of the Great Commoner was at 
an end. 

But this temporary check was only the prelude to a 
signal triumph. The real weakness of Devonshire's 
Cabinet had been its weakness in Parliament. Few 




THOMAS, DUKE OF NEWCASTLE (1715-I768). 
Portrait by William Hoare. 



1/4 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

people doubted Pitt's ability, or, in spite of its 
temporary check, his real popularity in the country. 
It seemed fairly obvious, that the only way out of an 
apparent deadlock was by an union of Newcastle's 
Parliamentary influence with Pitt's talents and pres- 
tige. But it is striking testimony to the surviving 
power of the royal preferences, and to the jealousies 
of public life, that, in the supreme crisis of the Seven 
Years' War, with the fate of the world at stake, it took 
nearly three months to come to the conclusion which 
most practical men must have regarded as inevitable. 
Party principles had almost disappeared. Newcastle 
had no policy, except the policy of office. No one 
could doubt that a vigorous prosecution of the French 
war was essential to the very existence of the State, 
and that in Pitt the country possessed an ideal War 
Minister. At length personal difficulties were over- 
come. Devonshire, with creditable patriotism, gave 
up the Treasury, and continued to support the 
Government in the honorary office of Chamberlain. 
Newcastle returned to the Treasury and the nominal 
leadership of the Ministry. Pitt and his friends — 
Temple, George Grenville, and Legge — resumed office, 
with the understanding that the real control of affairs 
should be in the hands of Pitt. 

Almost at once, as if by magic, the face of affairs 
changed. The terrible defeat of the Duke of Cum- 
berland at Lauffeld, and the consequent surrender 
at Klosterseven, were the last tragedies of the old 
order. Before the end of the year (1757) came the 
news of the brilliant victory of Clive at Plassey, and 
the conquest of Bengal. In 1758 the recapture of 



klSE OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 1 75 

Fort Duquesne wiped out the memory of Braddock's 
defeat, and secured Western America for the British. 
In the same year, the capture of Louisberg and Cape 
Breton threatened the French supremacy in Canada. 
Liberal subsidies to Frederick of Prussia enabled him 
to hold the Continental alliance at bay. Vigorous 
attacks on the coast of France prevented the despatch 
of reinforcements to the French in America. In 
1759 the disgrace of Lauffeld was retrieved by the 
great victory of Minden, in which the French were 
routed by the new commander of the British and 
Hanoverian troops on the Continent, Ferdinand of 
Brunswick. But this was as nothing to the brilliant 
series of victories at Ticonderoga, Crown Point, 
Niagara, and finally on the Heights of the Abraham, 
by which the whole of Canada was wrested from 
France, and the equally brilliant series of Wandewash, 
Pondicherry, and the Hooghly, whereby the power 
not of France only, but of Holland, was for ever 
broken in India. In less than four years the nation 
passed from the depths of despair to the summit of 
glory. A world-empire had arisen, as it were in a 
night. In 1757 Britain was the least of the great 
Powers, if indeed she could claim to rank at all with 
France, and Austria, and Spain. In 1760 she em- 
braced the earth with both arms, and bade fair to 
restore the fabled greatness of the mighty empires of 
the ancient world. 

It would appear incredible, that a Ministry which 
had achieved such miracles should be on the brink 
of destruction ; yet such, in fact, was the case. In 
1760, at the height of his kingdom's glory, George II. 



176 THE SYSTEM ON ITS TRIAL 

died ; and the advent of his successor announced a 
new era in English poHtics. Almost at once (Octo- 
ber, 1 761), Pitt, who had discovered the existence 
of a secret treaty, known as the Family Compact, 
between France and Spain, resigned because his 
colleagues refused to credit his information. The 
hollowness of their excuse was shown when, in the 
very next year, the war which he had urged was 
declared. But, in truth, a new influence, incompatible 
with existing arrangements, was at work ; and the 
speedy resignation of Newcastle marks the transition 
to a different order. 

To conclude this chapter, it may be well to indi- 
cate the real contribution of Pitt's first two Ministries 
to the evolution of the Cabinet System. His advent 
to power in 1756 points to the appearance of a new 
factor in politics — the factor of public approval, as 
distinguished from the approval of the House of 
Commons. That this new power was perfectly realised 
by the King, is shown by George's famous remark to 
Pitt himself. " You have taught me," he said, " to 
look for the sense of my subjects in another place 
than the House of Commons." But Pitt's dismissal 
in 1757, and his subsequent difficult reconciliation 
with Newcastle, showed, too, that mere popularity, 
without the steady exercise of Parliamentary 
influence, though it might place a Minister in office, 
was not sufficient to keep him there. It is easy to 
assume that the man who pleases the nation must 
also of necessity please the representative House. 
In an ideal democracy the assumption would,no doubt, 
be approximately true. But England in 1756 was 



The new factor in politics lyy 

very far from being an ideal democracy ; and the so- 
called representative House was, in fact, one of the 
great bulwarks of aristocratic privilege. It may be 
that, in spite of Reform Bills and Ballot Acts, the 
House fulfils an analogous function at the present 
day. At least it is well to bear in mind, that the 
Chief Minister of England is not, like the American 
President, chosen by the direct suffrages of the 
people,^ but by a curious process of indirect selec- 
tion, the precise character of which is still not 
entirely free from dispute. 

^ Curiously enough, the framers of the American Constitution 
attempted to provide an indirect system for the election of the 
President. But, as every one knows, the double election has been a 
farce for more than a century. And, in any case, the presidential 
electors are chosen ad hoc ; and it is expressly provided that they shall 
not be members of the legislative body. 




A 



13 



VII 



A PATRIOT KING 



During the first twenty years of the long reign of 
George III. the last serious attempt to stifle the 
growth of the Cabinet System took place. It was 
so vigorously conducted, so long maintained, and so 
nearly successful, that a study of its methods becomes 
imperative at this point. 

It is usual, of course, to attribute the attack to the 
personal efforts of the young King who ascended the 
throne in 1760. George III. was the son of that 
Frederick, Prince of Wales, who had faithfully 
adopted the Hanoverian tradition, by which the 
eldest son of the reigning monarch assumed an 
attitude of hostility to his father, and whose house 
had been the meeting-place of those " Patriots " of 
whom Walpole spoke with such bitter contempt. In 
a sense, the Opposition which gathered round the 
Prince may be termed the first example of a " con- 
stitutional Opposition," for it did not, as the Jacobite 
Opposition did, aim at changing the dynasty. But 

it was unfortunate that it should seek the protection 

178 



EDUCATION OF THE KING 1/9 

of the Heir-Apparent ; for such a course inevitably 
imperilled the growing maxim of government, so 
essential to the success of the Cabinet System, that 
the monarch should take no personal part in 
politics. 

On the death of the Prince, in 175 1, his widow, 
the Princess Augusta of Saxe Gotha, continued, 
though with some caution, the attitude of her 
husband, more particularly in her dislike of the 
system by which, as it seemed to her, the monarch 
was reduced to the position of a cipher in his own 
kingdom. As this system had been, emphatically, 
the work of the Whigs, it was natural that she should 
be drawn towards their rivals, the Tories, who were 
now, owing to the deaths of the older members of the 
party, and the virtual abandonment of the Stuart 
claims, becoming rapidly reconciled to the Hanoverian 
dynasty. But it was somewhat ominous, that both 
Harcourt and Waldegrave, Tories as they were, 
and very far from favouring the independence of 
Ministers, had been found incompatible with the 
ideas which received favour at Leicester House after 
the death of the Prince of Wales, and had been 
compelled to yield to the more pronounced servility 
of Bute and Stone. 

The education of her youthful son, the future 
monarch, played, of course, a great part in the plans 
of the Princess. It is commonly assumed that Boling- 
broke's famous tract, The Idea of a Patriot King, 
was written with a special view to the formation of 
the mind of the young Prince ; and, though we may 
well doubt whether a man of Bolingbroke's notorious 



l80 A PATRIOT KING 

character could ever really be trusted by one whose 
whole fortunes were bound up with the Hanoverian 
succession, it can hardly be denied that this at least 
was the popular belief at the time. The pamphlet 
itself, at the present day, reads like a string of the 
veriest platitudes. But it was directed, with con- 
summate skill, against those whom, despite their 
lenient treatment of him, its author regarded with 
feelings of bitter aversion ; and we may be well 
assured, that there were not wanting those who 
would interpret its hidden allusions for the benefit 
of the Princess and her son. Moreover, there were 
certain lessons inculcated by it which could hardly 
fail to be acceptable to the ears of royalty. *' First 
then, he " (the Prince) " must begin to govern as 
soon as he begins to reign." Such advice was not 
likely to be thrown away on the daughter-in-law of 
George II. "To espouse no party, but to govern 
like the common father of his people" would appear, 
to a youthful and ambitious prince, the plainest 
duty of his position. But if the Patriot King is to 
"espouse no party, much less will he proscribe any" ; 
for, as the writer suggests, and with some reason, 
Toryism is now clear of the taint of Jacobitism. On 
the other hand, the really sound advice of Boling- 
broke, to allow personal favourites no share in matters 
of State, appears to have been neglected ; for do we 
not all, princes and private men alike, select from 
the advice of our counsellors such items as please us, 
and overlook those which go not with our feelings ? 

A much more respectable Mentor of the youthful 
Telemachus was Sir William Blackstone, whose 



BLACK stone's COMMENTARIES l8l 

rising fame as a jurist almost exactly tallies with the 
most impressionable years of the future King. His 
famous Commentaries on the Laws of England^ 
though not published till 1765, had been taking 
shape for at least ten years previously ; and it is con- 
fidently stated that the manuscript was borrowed for 
the use of the Prince. Deeply respectful of authority, 
while at the same time maintaining an appearance 
of independence, florid in expression, cheerfully 
optimistic in style, easy of comprehension, Black- 
stone's lectures were exactly fitted to captivate a 
mind like that of George III. Blackstone was a 
lawyer, lecturing on law, and he therefore, quite 
properly, ignored all those conventions and practices, 
which, however essential to the conduct of daily life, 
had not obtained definite recognition by Courts of 
Justice. More particularly was this the case in the 
chapters in which the writer dealt with the govern- 
ment of his country. All that intricate growth of 
custom which, as we have tried to show, had, in the 
previous half century, completely altered the character 
of English politics, he entirely overlooked ; for it had 
not when he wrote (has not even now) become part 
of that law of which Courts of Justice take account. 
With Blackstone, the King is " not only the chief, 
but properly the sole, magistrate of the nation," and 
the author does not deem it necessary to " investigate 
the powers and duties of His Majesty's great officers 
of state, the lord treasurer, lord chamberlain, the 
principal secretaries, or the like ; because I do not 
know that they are in that capacity in any con- 
siderable degree the objects of our laws, or have any 



1 82 A PATRIOT KING 

very important share of magistracy conferred upon 
them." It is easy to understand that the pupil of Bute, 
whose close friendship with the Princess was causing 
scandal even before the death of George II., should 
adopt the view, that the whole system of Cabinet 
government was a deliberate encroachment upon the 
just rights of the monarch, harmful alike to King 
and people. From the very moment of his accession, 
the youthful King bent himself, with all the tenacity 
of a singularly tenacious mind, to restore the 
medieval monarchy. 

But it is hardly to be supposed, that the will of a 
youthful monarch, without political experience and 
with very little natural intelligence, would have 
succeeded in upsetting, even for a time, a system 
which it was the interest of so many powerful 
statesmen to maintain, unless it had been favoured 
by special circumstances. 

One of these circumstances was the condition of 
political parties in England. The great weakness of 
the Cabinet System at the time lay in the fact, 
that it was the possession of a single party. The 
Tories had never accepted it. Long excluded as a 
party from all hopes of office, they had never ceased 
to denounce the system of Ministerial patronage 
which, as they alleged, was practised with the sole 
object of accumulating offices in the hands of greedy 
adventurers. As a consequence of their exclusion 
from power, what may be called the practical Opposi- 
tion, i.e., the possible successors of a defeated Ministry, 
had long consisted of discontented members of the 
party in power. Differing thus from one another on 



WEAKNESS OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 1 83 

no great principles, but only on personal questions, it 
was inevitable that the struggles of Ministers and 
Opposition should sink to the level of mere factious 
disputes about place and power. This truth had 
been strikingly manifested in the long interval which 
had elapsed between the fall of Walpole and the 
accession of Pitt to high office ; and although the 
latter event had brought into existence a Cabinet 
which, after an almost unprecedented series of 
triumphs, seemed to present an unassailable front, 
yet Pitt himself, the very man who represented the 
new order, disgusted with the tyranny of Newcastle, 
was borrowing the language of Bolingbroke, and 
talking of the necessity of breaking up party divi- 
sions. Thus one great party, just reawakening to 
life after an enforced torpor of half a century, and 
inheriting from its Jacobite ancestry a tradition of 
prerogative, was positively hostile to the Cabinet 
System, while the most distinguished member of the 
other was expressing, with all the vigour and reck- 
lessness which characterised his actions, his disbelief 
in that system. 

As he looked abroad, the King found still stronger 
confirmation of his views. Whilst the last hundred 
years had done much to lessen the personal weight 
of the monarchy in English politics, the same period 
had witnessed an extraordinary development of 
absolutism on the Continent. The long reign of 
Louis XIV. in France had resulted in a system in 
which everything turned upon the personal caprice 
of the King. The nobles had been converted into 
Court grandees, who vied with one another in abject 



184 A PATRIOT KING 

servility to the Crown. The disappearance of the 
States-General had left even the power of taxation 
in the hands of the monarch ; and although the Parlia- 
ments, or Supreme Law Courts, made a show of 
resistance, the absence of an uniform system of law 
weakened and divided their counsels. The rising 
power of Prussia was simply a drilled camp obeying 
the commands of the King. In Austria and in Spain 
the one avenue to political office was the personal 
favour of the monarch ; and the steady advance of 
Russia in European importance threw a powerful 
weight into the scale of despotism. George could 
not but feel that, beside his brother monarchs, he 
would be a king in name only if he accepted his 
grandfather's position ; and, conscious of his popu- 
larity and of the honesty of his aims he determined 
to make a bold bid for power. 

His first choice of an adviser was characteristic. 
During the last i^w years of George II.'s reign, Lord 
Bute had secured a complete ascendency in the 
councils of Leicester House ; and the great object of 
the young prince and his mother had been to secure 
for the King a recognition of his alleged merits. By 
dint of unscrupulous -manoeuvring they had succeeded, 
even before the old King's death, in overcoming the 
latter's dislike of the favourite, to the extent of obtain- 
ing for him the office of Groom of the Stole. The 
rancour of national and political feeling forbids us to 
accept the contemporary estimate of Bute as any 
approach to the truth. But there is, on the other hand, 
no evidence that he had any political ability. His 
original patron, Frederick, Prince of Wales, said of 




Copyright^\ 



\Gibbings df Co. 



THE EARL OF BUTE (1713-I792), 
Portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds. 



1 86 A PATRIOT KING 

him, somewhat unkindly, that he would make an 
excellent ambassador in a Court where there was no 
business ; and it was undeniable that he owed his 
fortunes almost entirely to his handsome person and 
the servility of his views. He was now called upon 
by the King to draw up the Speech to be delivered 
by the new ruler at his first Council ; and, so far 
more successful than Compton at the accession of 
George II., he managed to produce a draft of a kind. 
The jealous criticism of Englishmen saw matter of 
suspicion in the fact that the King was made to 
glory in the name of " Briton " ^ ; but Pitt found far 
graver cause for censure in the clause which stigma- 
tised the war as "bloody and expensive," and he 
insisted that, in the copies printed for circulation, 
the qualifying epithets of "just and necessary" 
should be added. It was soon evident, that the line 
to be adopted by the favourite was that of procuring 
a peace at all costs ; and the obvious purpose of the 
King, combined with the skilful sowing of discord 
between Pitt and Newcastle, produced, as we have 
seen, the resignation of the former in 1761. Even 
before that time a palace intrigue had got rid of 
Lord Holdernesse, Pitt's colleague in the secretary- 
ship of State, and, to the disgust of the Cabinet, 
his place was filled by Bute. Almost at the same 
moment, Legge, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a 
personal enemy of the favourite, was rudely dis- 
missed, his place being filled by Lord Barrington, a 
devoted adherent of the prerogative ; while Charles 

' The satire of the time alleged that the draftsman originally spelt 
the word " Britain." 



THE BUTE MINISTRY 1 8/ 

Townshend, a brilliant but erratic genius, destined to 
outvie the follies of Carteret, was admitted to office 
as Secretary at War. In 1762 Newcastle, now 
thoroughly baffled, was compelled to resign ; and 
Bute, throwing off all disguise, appeared in the great 
office of First Lord of the Treasury, as the osten- 
sible head of the Ministry, while to Sir Francis 
Dashwood, an utterly reckless adventurer of noto- 
rious character, was given the responsible post of 
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Thus, in less than 
two years, a Ministry, which had raised the country 
to the height of glory, was driven from office to 
make way for a Ministry of Court favourites and 
buffoons. 

So rapid was the change, and so vigorous the 
onslaught, that the forces of Opposition seem for the 
moment to have been paralysed. Bute pushed on 
the negotiations for peace, and found his enemy, 
as might have been expected, only too ready to 
treat with one who manifested the utmost willing- 
ness to grant easy terms. Nor can the Peace of 
Paris (February 10, 1763) be regarded as unfavour- 
able to Great Britain. The victories of Wolfe and 
Boscawen secured the great Dominion of Canada for 
the British ; the French only kept the little islands 
of St. Pierre and Miquelon off Newfoundland. In 
America, the Mississippi became the boundary of 
British rule ; and Spain gave up her claims to Florida. 
The national pride was gratified by the restoration 
of Minorca, notwithstanding the failure of Byng ; 
and the French king undertook once more to demo- 
lish the fortifications of Dunkirk. On the other 



1 88 A PATRIOT KING 

hand, the French received back Pondicherry and 
their other Indian possessions, though with a condi- 
tion that they should not be fortified ; and Spain, 
which had suffered severely in the last two years of 
the war,i recovered Cuba, Havannah, and the Phihp- 
pines, while Louisiana was ceded to her by France 
as compensation for the loss of Florida. The West 
Indian islands were divided between Britain and 
France ; but Britain obtained the lion's share. 

Bute, however, had not succeeded in carrying out 
the King's wishes without making at least one humi- 
liating sacrifice. He soon discovered that . it was 
impossible to carry on the government, without a 
really strong representative of the Court in the House 
of Commons. The King might employ the secret 
service money and use the Crown influence at elec- 
tions ; but the House, secure in the secrecy of its 
debates, could not be brought to heel by directions 
issued from a distant council-chamber. Sir Francis 
Dashwood, the natural representative of the Govern- 
ment in the House, was a mere Court nominee, 
without influence and without political reputation. 
The nature of his principles may be gathered from 
the fact that, after bringing forward the first Radical 
resolution in favour of Parliamentary Reform, and 
making himself notorious as the chosen friend of the 
demagogue Wilkes, he accepted office in a Ministry, 
the chief object of which was to destroy popular 

^ Pitt's prescience had been shown by the fact that, in the very 
next year after his resignation, the Ministers who forced that resigna- 
tion had been obliged to follow his advice and declare war against 
Spain. 



PERSECUTION OF WHIGS 1 89 

influence in politics. Bute accordingly cast his eyes 
on Henry Fox, Newcastle's old colleague, a man of 
great ability and experience, who then enjoyed the 
lucrative office of Paymaster of the Forces, but 
without a seat in the Cabinet. Fox was, person- 
ally, most distasteful to the King, and it was 
with the greatest difficulty that the monarch could 
be brought to yield to hard necessity. At last he 
gave way, and the wisdom of the step was shown by 
the success of the new Minister in persuading the 
House to accept the Peace. But the bargain reeked 
of iniquity, and the disgraceful corruption which 
Bute and Fox had to practise seems to have soured 
the tempers of both. The Government embarked on 
a course of savage persecution of its opponents, 
which roused the bitterest feelings of hostility in the 
nation, and threatened to inflict on the country the 
worst evils of the " spoils system," without the 
excuse that such a desperate remedy was necessary 
to maintain party government in existence. New- 
castle, Grafton, and Rockingham were deprived of 
the lieutenancies of their counties, although the post 
had hitherto (with rare exceptions) been treated as 
a life office. Devonshire was dismissed from the 
Chamberlainship and the Privy Council with every 
circumstance of ignominy. Nor did the persecution 
stop at high rank. Humble officials, whose only 
crime was that they had owed their positions to 
Whig Ministers, were hunted out and dismissed. 
Pensions which had been bestowed for really meri- 
torious services were forfeited. Every effort was 
made to render it perfectly clear, that no one who 



I90 A PATRIOT KING' 

was not prepared to follow blindly the directions of 
the Court need ever hope for the slightest recognition 
by the State. 

But Bute was very much mistaken if he supposed 
that a high-spirited nation would tamely submit to 
treatment of this kind. Englishmen may easily be 
led by flattery, too often, it is to be feared, by bribery. 
But they will seldom submit to be bullied, least of all 
by a man whom they regard as an alien. In the 
hour of his apparent triumph, Bute felt the ground 
slipping from beneath his feet. The murmur of 
sullen resentment grew louder. No persuasions or 
threats could induce the great public bodies of the 
country to offer congratulations on the Peace. The 
people much preferred to burn Bute in effigy, and 
to indulge in scandalous stories about the Princess 
Dowager. Pitt was still the real leader of the nation. 
When he joined the King's procession to Guildhall, 
his coach was surrounded by adoring multitudes ; 
while the King was left in cold neglect. It was in 
vain that Fox marshalled his well-paid majorities in 
the Commons. People were beginning to feel that 
the House itself was not the final arbiter of the 
nation's destinies. Thoroughly frightened by the 
storm he had raised, Bute determined to resign. On 
April 8, 1763, the public was astonished to learn 
that the all-powerful Minister had given up his 
office. 

Thus the first attempt to crush the Cabinet System 
had met an ignominious fate. But if the Whigs 
imagined that the King would abandon the cherished 
purpose of his life at the first rebuff, they underesti- 




Portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds. 



192 A PATRIOT KING 

mated the resources of the man with whom they 
had to deal. 

The second stage in the struggle has been de- 
picted for us in the classical pages of Burke, whose 
Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents^ 
published in 1770, is of great value, not merely as 
a masterly analysis of contemporary politics, but 
as the first adequate account of that new system 
which the King was seeking to destroy. The great 
merit of the work lies in its happy combination 
of philosophical breadth of treatment with practical 
knowledge. The writer is neither a mere philosopher 
nor a mere politician ; he is, in the best sense of that 
noble word, a statesman, a man who overlooks neither 
permanent principles nor immediate needs, but accords 
a due weight to both. His language never loses the 
dignity of literature, though it has all the vigour of 
journalism. The student who would appreciate its full 
beauty should compare it with one or two of the con- 
temporary Letters of Junius. The latter owe what 
little interest they now possess to the trenchant vigour 
of their style, and to the impenetrable mystery which, 
for nearly a century and a half, has hung around 
their authorship. Burke's pamphlet is as full of 
teaching to-day as it was when it was published. Its 
one defect is due to the brilliance of its author's 
imagination, which occasionally led him to attribute 
to the mere temporary schemes of his opponents, a 
definiteness and a thoroughness of which the authors 
of those schemes were incapable. But, with due 
allowance for this drawback, it is still the most 
luminous guide we have to the seven years which 
followed the resignation of Bute. 




GEORGE GRENVILLE (1712-I770). 
Portrait by Ridley. 



194 ^ PATRIOT KING 

According to Burke, the objects which George III. 
set before himself, in the second stage of his struggle 
with the system which he was determined to destroy, 
were, to separate the Court, as the centre of the 
personal influence of the King, from the ostensible 
Ministry of the day ; to maintain a powerful body of 
followers, dependent entirely on the personal favour 
of the King, and independent of the Ministry ; and, 
finally, to alienate the House of Commons from the 
Ministry, and thus to deprive the latter of that 
stronghold which, in the Cabinet System, is the great 
source of its power. To this end it was necessary, 
first, that all men of commanding influence, either in 
the House of Commons or in the nation, should be ex- 
cluded from the Cabinet; secondly, that the Ministers 
should, so far as possible, be confined each to the 
administration of his own department ; thirdly, that 
the Ministers should be discredited in the eyes of the 
country, either by their characters, or by the odium 
of appearing to authorise unpopular acts ; and, finally, 
that, by the exercise of patronage and corruption, the 
majority in the House of Commons should be at the 
disposal of the secret agents of the Court. 

Nothing can be a surer testimony to the weakness 
of the political morality of the day, than that such 
a scheme should have been feasible. The man 
selected by the King to play the odious part of First 
Minister in the piece was George Grenville, the 
brother-in-law of Pitt, a man who owed his official 
position almost entirely to the popularity of the 
Great Commoner, but who regarded politics mainly 
as a profession, and who, on the fall of Pitt's Ministry, 




JOHN WILKES (l 727-1797). 
Portrait by Hogarth. 



196 A PATRIOT KING 

had not hesitated to take service under Bute. 
Grenville had not even the excuse of personal de- 
votion to the Crown, for, in his pedantic way, he was 
a professed Whig, and treated his royal master with 
a rudeness which led to his dismissal in 1765. With 
him were joined Egremont, a Tory nobleman of 
little ability, Halifax, a nominal Whig of equally 
little weight, Henley, one of the least respectable of 
the long line of occupants of the woolsack, the Duke 
of Bedford, an unpopular and notoriously un- 
scrupulous wirepuller, the head of the malcontent Whig 
faction known as the " Bloomsbury Gang," Gower, 
one of Bedford's least reputable followers. Sandwich, 
the profligate companion of Wilkes, and Henry Fox, 
now Lord Holland, whose conduct over the Peacs 
had deprived him of all claims to political honesty. 
Within such a body there could be no cordial co- 
operation, and for such a body there could be no 
popular respect. It was exactly calculated to illus- 
trate by its defects the principle laid down by Burke 
that, in a popular system of government, the only 
sound bases of political authority are power arising 
from popularity and power arising from connection. 

The life of this Ministry was short and disgraceful. 
Almost immediately after its appointment, the 
country was plunged into a ferment of excitement 
by the proceedings connected with the first prose- 
cution of Wilkes. John Wilkes was a notorious 
demagogue of infamous character, who had estab- 
lished in 1762 a paper called The North Briton^ 
which rivalled in outspokenness and scurrility, though 
not in ability, the famous Craftsman of Bolingbroke. 



PROSECUTION OF WILKES 1 97 

In No. 45 of The North Briton there appeared an 
article, criticising with great severity the royal speech 
which closed Parliament in April, 1763. The article 
in question very carefully refrained from making any 
personal reflection on the King, and ostentatiously 
treated the Speech from the Throne as the work of 
the King's Ministers. At the present day, such a 
course of action would be regarded as thoroughly 
constitutional ; and, even in 1763, it was generally 
admitted, that the practice of half a century had 
sanctioned the assumption on which the article was 
based. But the King chose to consider the attack as 
directed against himself, and insisted that its author 
should be prosecuted for a seditious libel. The 
prosecution was completely political in its character. 
Halifax, the Secretary of State, signed a General 
Warrant {i.e., a warrant containing no names) 
authorising a search to be made for the authors of 
the alleged libel, a process which resulted in a series 
of steps such as we now associate with the political 
system of Russia, and which openly violated a 
cardinal rule of English justice, that it is for the 
prosecution, and not for the accused, to furnish 
evidence in support of a criminal charge. Under 
the warrant, nearly fifty persons were arrested and 
imprisoned, including Wilkes himself, who was at 
this time a member of the House of Commons. 

Wilkes lost no time in testing the validity of these 
proceedings by applying for a writ of Habeas Corpus, 
upon the return of which he was at once set at liberty 
by Pratt, afterwards Lord Camden, the Chief Justice 
of the Common Pleas. Unfortunately Pratt, though 



1 98 A PATRIOT KING 

he expressed a pretty clear opinion of the invalidity 
of the General Warrant, rested his decision upon the 
fact that Wilkes was a member of Parliament, and 
could not therefore be arrested for anything but 
treason, felony, or breach of the peace, under none of 
which categories was included the crime of seditious 
libel. But the invalidity of General Warrants was 
expressly asserted a year or two later by the great 
Lord Mansfield, in the course of actions in which 
several of the other persons arrested recovered heavy 
damages against Lord Halifax and his agents. 

Nothing daunted by its first rebuff, the Court 
began a regular criminal prosecution against Wilkes 
for seditious libel. In this step it was, of course, 
legally justified, for Chief Justice Pratt's decision 
had merely pronounced against the regularity of 
the procedure, not against the substance of the 
charge. But the King's impatience would not allow 
him to await the regular issue of proceedings. On 
the re-assembling of Parliament in November, 1763, 
he sent a royal message, calling the attention of the 
House of Commons to the alleged libel. The House 
promptly responded to the hint, and passed two 
resolutions, the first denouncing the article in No. 45 
as a false, scandalous, and malicious libel, and the 
second alleging that privilege of Parliament did not 
extend to such cases. 

The bias of the House in these proceedings was 
evident. The first resolution was entirely outside 
the scope of its authority, for it was an attempt by 
a non-judicial body to anticipate the decision of a 
question which, at that very moment, was pending in 




CHIEF JUSTICE PRATT (CAMDEN) (1713-I794). 
Portrait by Hopwood. 



200 A PATRIOT KING 

a regular Court of Justice. The second was a direct 
reversal of the steady policy of the House during the 
past two centuries, in which it had striven, by every 
means in its power, to extend the area of privilege, 
even to the extent of protecting, not merely members, 
but their families and servants, from arrest. More- 
over, it was entirely contrary to the facts of history. 

But the subservience of Ministers and Parliament 
did not stop at this point. During the proceedings 
it was whispered that Wilkes had composed an 
obscene poem, entitled An Essay on lVo;/ian, for 
the delectation of the choice spirits of the Medmen- 
ham Club. As a matter of fact, it is very doubtful 
whether Wilkes did really compose the poem ; but, 
at any rate, it is clear that he did not publish it, 
and could not therefore be guilty of libel. The 
Government, however, by the employment of its 
favourite methods, succeeded in getting some of the 
proof-sheets from Wilkes's printer ; and the House of 
Lords was edified by hearing Lord Sandwich, who 
certainly knew more of the matter than most people, 
descant at large upon the wickedness of his former 
associate, and virtuously demand prosecution of the 
offender. 

Before this time, however, worse had happened. 
It is to be feared that the annals of England are not 
free from instances of judicial murder ; but it was 
long since an English Ministry had resorted to the 
plan of private assassination. Yet in November, 1763, 
Martin, a well-known agent of Bute, ostentatiously 
forced upon Wilkes a duel in which Wilkes was 
gravely, it was long thought mortally, wounded. 



THE G RENVILLE MINISTRY 20I 

There is, of course, no direct proof that Martin was 
employed by the Court or the Ministry. But there is 
proof that he had long and deliberately prepared 
himself for the duel, that he forced it deliberately on 
Wilkes, that, though the challenger, he insisted on 
the choice of weapons ; and it is undeniably true that, 
though Wilkes petitioned the House for delay on 
account of his illness, his petition was rejected, and 
sentence of expulsion passed in January, 1764, while 
the Government, during his absence, proceeded to 
outlaw him in the King's Bench on the charge of 
libel. Thus the King, both Houses of Parliament, 
and the Ministers, combined to ruin a single indivi- 
dual, whose one real offence had been that of criti- 
cising a public act of government. Such an open 
display of tyranny provoked the strongest feeling 
throughout the country. The attacks of the Press 
became more violent, and were met by relentless 
prosecutions, while the most shameless corruption was 
resorted to for the purpose of securing a docile 
majority in the Commons. Thus, as Burke points 
out, the House, one of whose most important func- 
tions it was to criticise and control the Court, became 
a mere engine for carrying out its behests. 

On the Grenville Ministry falls also the respon- 
sibility of taking the first steps in that disastrous 
policy, which in later years led to the fatal breach 
with the American colonies. These settlements, after 
passing through various initial stages, were rapidly 
assuming a condition of great prosperity. The steady 
growth of population had done even more than the 
victories of Pitt to decide the rivalry for the New 



202 A PATRIOT KING 

World in favour of Britain. With the exception of 
Georgia, the American colonies had all become self- 
supporting ; and the wise liberality of the preceding 
half century had gradually converted the old proprie- 
tary interests into free and self-governing communi- 
ties. Judged impartially, and with due allowance for 
the ideas of the time, the policy of the mother country 
seems to have been neither oppressive nor ungenerous. 
The elaborate provisions of the Navigation Acts, 
introduced by the Commonwealth and adopted at 
the Restoration, for the purpose of securing the 
carrying trade of the world to the English mer- 
cantile marine, were re-enacted, after the Revolution, 
in 1696. The system was a bad one ; for it involved 
the maintenance of an army of preventive officials, 
and imposed annoying restrictions upon the natural 
development of industry. But there is to be said in 
its favour, that it was undoubtedly to the permanent 
interest of the American colonies that their energies 
should be directed to the immediate development of 
their vast territories, rather than to international com- 
merce, and that the Navigation Acts did undoubtedly 
succeed in producing a vast increase of the English 
shipping. At first the English monopoly of the 
colonial trade had been confined to enumerated 
articles ; but, as new products made their appear- 
ance — rice, molasses, beaver skins, copper ore — these 
were added to the list, until it became accepted as a 
principle of British commerce, that the whole of the 
colonial export trade should be in English hands. 
As a compensation to the colonies, the growth of 
tobacco in Great Britain and the Channel Islands had 



COLONIAL TRADE 203 

been entirely prohibited, so that the whole of the vast 
and increasing demand for tobacco in Great Britain 
was supplied from the colonies ; and a long series of 
statutes was passed for the encouragement of Ameri- 
can enterprise, by the gift of bounties on the import 
from the colonies of tar, hemp, timber and other naval 
stores, coffee, and indigo, and for the rebate of duty 
on new colonial produce, such as silk, flax, whale oil, 
iron, and pearlash. Best of all, the growth of the 
commercial spirit in England during the first half of 
the eighteenth century, and the jealousy of prero- 
gative manifested by Parliament, had prevented the 
English colonial system assuming, as that of France 
had done, the character of a religious or military 
mission, or, like that of Holland, of a jealous official 
monopoly. So far as their internal affairs were 
concerned, the colonists, on the mainland at any rate, 
governed themselves pretty much as they pleased. 
The so-called " sugar colonies," Jamaica, Barbadoes, 
and the West Indies generally, having been acquired 
by conquest, were far more under the control of the 
Board of Trade ; and were, accordingly, the special 
favourites of the Crown. 

Of two very serious grievances the colonists had, 
however, to complain. As their products grew in 
volume, it often happened that the mother country 
was unable to absorb them all. The natural result 
would have been, that the surplus should be de- 
voted to the extension of foreign trade ; but this the 
restrictions of the Navigation Acts forbade, except 
in the costly form of re-exportation from England. 
Accordingly, a great smuggling trade grew up between 



204 A PATRIOT KING 

the mainland colonies, which grew little sugar, and 
the French West Indian islands, which, in return for 
the horses, timber, and other produce of America, 
sent to the mainland sugar, molasses, and rum. A 
desperate attempt on the part of the English West 
India colonies to crush this technically illegal trade 
was defeated in 1733 by the vigilance of Sir John 
Barnard, a man to whose enlightened appreciation of 
sound principles of commerce England owes much ; 
and the West Indians had to be contented with the 
establishment of a protective system which, bad as it 
was, at least had the merit of implicitly recognising 
the direct trade between the French West Indies and 
America. It has also been mentioned (p. 147) that 
W^alpole, about the same time, took the admirable 
step of setting free the rice trade of the Carolinas, by 
allowing the direct export from those colonies to 
European ports in British vessels. But, in spite of 
these palliations, the grievance of the Navigation 
Acts pressed with increasing severity on the growing 
industries of America. 

The second great cause of complaint, and one 
which was in no way a necessary consequence of the 
Navigation policy, arose from the determined hostility 
manifested by British manufacturers to the develop- 
ment of manufactures in the colonies. That pro- 
tective duties should have been imposed at British 
ports on the products of American factories, was fully 
in accordance with the orthodox political economy 
of the day. But the British Parliament, at the 
instigation of the manufacturers, went much further. 
In the year 1732, during Walpole's tenure of 



BRITISH COMMERCIAL JEALOUSY 205 

* 

office, an Act of Parliament totally prohibited the 
export of felts and hats from any British plantation, 
and even subjected the manufacture for home con- 
sumption to vexatious restrictions. In 1750, the 
manufacture of iron in the colonies was totally pro- 
hibited ; and it was even enacted, that if any mill or 
forge were erected, it should be destroyed as a 
common nuisance. It was evident from these statutes, 
that the British policy towards colonial industries 
was to be steadily directed towards maintaining them 
in a state of perpetual infancy. 

Such was the legal relationship between Great 
Britain and her American colonies on the assumption 
of office by Grenville in 1763. But it must not be 
forgotten, that Pitt's victories on the American con- 
tinent, by shattering the power of the French, had 
relieved the colonies from a fear which had, perhaps 
more than anything else, disposed them to cling to 
the mother country. Now that this constant anxiety 
was removed, the colonists were more at leisure to 
criticise the restrictions which hampered their grow- 
ing trade, and less disposed to submit quietly to the 
dictates of British commercial jealousy. 

A wise statesman would have foreborne to 
aggravate the dangers of an already dangerous 
situation. But Grenville was not a wise statesman. 
His narrow mind had, even before his assumption of 
the reins of power, been annoyed by the frequent 
evasions of the Navigation Acts at which his wiser 
predecessors had connived. Even as First Lord of 
the Admiralty, in Bute's Ministry, he had gone out of 
his way to recommend a vigorous enforcement of 



206 A PATRIOT KING 

the law ; and his remonstrances had been successful 
in producing a strong feeling of irritation among the 
colonists. But now he determined on a bolder line. 
In the year 1764 he introduced into Parliament a 
Bill imposing Customs' duties on the importation of 
foreign commodities into America. The fallacy by 
which he attempted to justify this new departure was 
exposed with merciless severity by Burke, in his great 
speech on American Taxation, delivered in 1774. 
Grenville alleged, that he had but followed the 
innumerable precedents of the statute book in 
framing his measure. Burke pointed out that, in 
reality, Grenville's Act for the first time attempted 
to raise a revenue for Great Britain from the 
American colonies, that the earlier statutes had 
doubtless been in form Revenue Acts, but that their 
penalty clauses had been inserted, not for the purpose 
of raising revenue, but solely for the purpose of 
regulating. commerce according to the mistaken but 
generally accepted ideas of the time. Even the pre- 
amble of Grenville's own Act gave him the lie. For 
the first time in the history of the Navigation Acts 
a measure, alleged to be in support of that policy, had 
adopted the phraseology of a regular Bill of Supply. 
The total produce of the old " Plantation Duties" (as 
the revenue penalties for infringement of the Acts 
were called) had been a contemptible sum, hardly 
sufficient to build a single man-of-war ; and no one 
knew the fact better than George Grenville. Yet his 
measure spoke openly of the justice and necessity of 
making the colonies contribute to the expenses of a 
war which had been undertaken largely for their 



I 



grenville's acts 207 

benefit ; and, as if to mark a definite rupture with 
the old traditions, he followed up his first measure 
with an announcement of the intention of the Govern- 
ment to introduce, in the following session, a second 
Bill, which by no conceivable ingenuity could be 
brought within the scope of the Navigation Acts — a 
Bill, namely, for the imposition of stamp duties on 
legal documents used in the colonies. This measure, 
which, it may here be said, was duly passed in the 
year 1765, was peculiarly iniquitous ; for at that time, 
by the long-established policy of the nation, the 
stamp duties on legal documents were devoted to 
the payment of the expenses of the administration 
of justice. And these expenses were, in the colonies, 
already paid out of colonial funds. 

It is hardly worth while to dwell on the hollowness 
of the other arguments advanced by Grenville in 
justification of his measures. Great Britain had not 
expended vast sums in the war for the sake of the 
colonies, but for her own. Having, by her deliberate 
policy, deprived the colonies of all chance of creating 
a navy of their own, she had found herself compelled, 
on pain of losing her lucrative possessions, to defend 
them herself On the other hand, the colonies had 
made vast sacrifices in men and money during the 
war. Governor Bernard, of Massachusetts, a strong 
loyalist, told Grenville that his colony was paying 
^37>500 3. year towards the reduction of its war 
debt, and that the other colonies were suffering 
in proportion. On the other hand, the finances 
of Great Britain were thoroughly prosperous. The 
war had resulted in a great development of foreign 



208 A PATRIOT KING 

commerce, and there was no sort of necessity for 
desperate measures. It seems almost impossible to 
assign more than two equally discreditable motives 
for Grenville's policy. The King may have hoped 
that the anticipated revenue would go to increase 
the Civil List, and thus enable him to develope his 
favourite plan of corruption.^ But it is more than 
probable that the real motive was an obstinate and 
narrow-minded determination to enforce what the 
King and Grenville believed to be the legal rights 
of the mother country, regardless of consequences. 
In the emphatic words of Burke, the new policy was 
" a revenue, not substituted in the place of, but added 
to, monopoly ; which monopoly was at the same 
time enforced with additional strictness, and the 
execution put into military hands." 

Needless to say, the Acts were received with furious 
indignation, not only in America, but in commercial 
circles in England, whose members foresaw the ruin 
of a valuable colonial trade if they were enforced. 
For the colonies did not content themselves with 
sending formal petitions against the measures — 
petitions which were received with contemptuous 
indifference by the Ministry ; they took vigorous 
measures to establish what would now be called 
an universal boycott of goods shipped in British 
vessels, and of the obnoxious stamp duties. The 
complete success of their measures may be gathered 
from the fact, that the total produce of the American 

^ In the Bill as actually passed the fund was reserved for the disposal 
of Parliament, to be expended for the benefit of the Colonies. But 
this may have been an afterthought of the Ministers. 



FALL OF GRENVILLE 209 

duties, during the two years of their continuance, 
was less than ;^4,ooo ; the expenses of their adminis- 
tration amounted to ;^6,837. Burke has vividly 
depicted for us the scene in the lobby of the House 
of Commons which followed on the repeal of the 
measures ; and the enthusiasm of that moment is 
the surest index to the resentment aroused by the 
measures themselves. But apparently, nothing less 
than a quarrel with the King could have disturbed 
Grenville's power. Happily a quarrel of that kind 
supervened at the critical moment. 

In the spring of 1765 George HI. showed the first 
alarming symptom of that terrible illness which was 
to cloud his later years with a veil of tragedy. It 
became necessary to provide for the chance of a 
Regency. Grenville, to whom, as chief Minister, the 
task of framing the necessary measure fell, worded it 
so loosely, that serious doubts arose as to the persons 
in whom the Regency was really to be vested. In 
the debate in the Lords, Bedford and Halifax, two of 
the Ministers, succeeded in procuring the exclusion 
of the name of the Princess Dowager, the King's 
mother ; and Grenville, though passionately entreated 
by the King, refused to move an amendment, revers- 
ing the exclusion, in the Commons. What was the 
precise motive of Grenville's obstinacy it is difficult 
to discover^ ; Bedford and Halifax were, no doubt, 



' His own account [Grenville Papers^ vol. ii.) is that, as the omission 
had been sanctioned in the Lords by Halifax and Sandwich with the 
express permission of the King, an amendment by a Minister in the 
Commons would cause an appearance of disunion among the members 
of the Government. 

15 



210 A PATRIOT KING 

actuated by hatred of Bute. But the working of the 
new system was triumphantly vindicated, when the 
House of Commons, instigated by the secret agents 
of the Court, defeated its own nominal leader, and 
insisted on inserting the name of the Princess in the 
measure. A similar defeat would, both before and 
after 1765, have been the signal for the Minister's 
resignation ; but it is significant of the change which 
was coming over politics that Grenville, though he 
had forfeited the favour both of the King and the 
House, clung to his office. The King, however, was 
determined to get rid of him, and, after a desperate 
struggle of three months, succeeded in finding a 
successor. In July, 1765, Grenville retired, having, 
during his two years of office, sown a harvest of 
dragon's teeth, destined in a few years to plunge 
the kingdom into foreign and colonial war, and in- 
ternal strife. He had attempted to trample on the 
liberty of the subject, to violate the privileges of 
Parliament, and to override the first principles of 
political freedom. He was unpopular himself, his 
colleagues were unpopular, he had done much to 
weaken loyalty to the throne, and he had even shaken 
the very pillars of the State by raising doubts of the 
sovereign authority of the Crown in Parliament. It 
was not a happy beginning for a new system of 
government. 



VIII 



THE king's friends 



The fall of the Grenville Ministry produced an 
immediate change in the conduct of affairs. After 
vainly trying to induce Pitt to accept office, the King 
was at last compelled to call in the Marquis of 
Rockingham, a young nobleman of no particular 
abilities, but of high personal character, and the 
avowed representative of the Whig tradition of 
government. There can be little doubt that Rock- 
ingham's idea was to restore the Cabinet to the 
commanding position which it had occupied during 
the Pelham and Newcastle Ministries. The old 
Duke of Newcastle himself accepted office as Privy 
Seal, and, for the last time in his long career, enjoyed 
his favourite pleasure of dispensing patronage. The 
great Whig Dukes, Rutland, Portland, and Grafton, 
were included. The management of the Commons 
was entrusted to General Conway, a distinguished 
soldier, but not a very good debater ; and he was 
supported in the House by Dowdeswell, the new 
Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, if he was not a 



212 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

man of first-rate ability, was at least a great improve- 
ment on Sir Francis Dashwood. Somewhat foolishly, 
Rockingham allowed the Great Seal to remain in the 
hands of Lord Northington, instead of making the 
obvious choice of Lord Camden. The popularity of 
Lord Granby, the Commander-in-Chief, lent addi- 
tional strength to the Government ; but its great good 
fortune ^ay in the support of Pitt, who, though he 
declined to accept office, gave his hearty approval to 
its measures. 

It was by this time clear that the American opposi- 
tion to the Grenville measures was a very serious 
thing. The Assemblies of Virginia, Pennsylvania, 
and Massachusetts, the three leading colonies, passed 
resolutions strongly condemning the Stamp Act. 
Letters from unquestionable sources described the 
condition of the chief towns, especially Boston, as 
one of continued menace and tumult. The Governors 
attempted to call out the Militia to repress the dis- 
orders ; the Militia refused to respond. The disaffec- 
tion spread to Connecticut, Providence, and Rhode 
Island, and even to Carolina. The stamp officers, 
many of them Americans, were forced to resign their 
appointments. Most significant of all, there were 
proposals for a general congress of the colonies, to 
act independently of all constituted authority. 

But the protests were not confined to the colonies. 
To the amazement and indignation of Grenville, who 
had not foreseen that his favourite measures might 
injure the English merchant no less than the 
American planter, the great commercial towns of 
England began to petition against his pciicy. London 




LORD ROCKINGHAM (173O-I782). 
Portrait by B. Wilson. 



214 ^^^ KINGS FRIENDS 

led the way, and was speedily followed by Birming- 
ham, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Dudley, Maccles- 
field, Newcastle- on -Tyne, Nottingham, Glasgow, 
Liverpool, Halifax, Leeds, and Manchester. Their 
trade, the merchants urged, was being ruined by the 
suppression of the intercolonial commerce, and by 
the hostility produced by the Stamp Act. Finally, 
Benjamin Franklin, examined at great length by a 
Committee of the House of Commons, stoutly main- 
tained, that the Act was not only unjust, but utterly 
unpractical, that the means of distributing the stamps 
did not, in many cases, exist,i and could not be 
established except at a cost which would more than 
swallow up the returns. With great ingenuity, he 
contended that the colonies were completely qualified 
to produce all the necessaries of life for their own 
consumption ; and he did not hesitate to declare that 
they would rather go without luxuries than import 
them, from the mother country. His testimony to 
the feeling produced by the Act was clear and 
unwavering. " The temper of the colonies towards 
England before 1763 was the best in the world. . . . 
Natives of Britain were always treated with particular 
regard ; to be an Old England man was of itself a 
character of some respect, and gave a kind of rank 
among us." Now the temper was "very much 
altered." The respect for Parliament was "greatly 
lessened." If the Act were not repealed, there would 
be "a total loss of the respect and affection the 
people of America bear to this country, and of all 

' Franklin was peculiarly qualified to speak on this point, as he was 
Postmaster-General of North America. 



REPEAL OF THE STAMP ACT 215 

the commerce that depends on that respect and 
affection." 

The new Ministry determined on conciHatory 
measures. Even before the meeting of ParHament, 
in December, 1765, Conway, as Secretary of State, 
sent a temperately worded circular to the Governors 
of the colonies, deprecating the disorders, and in- 
sisting on a firm front, but suggesting prudence, and 
hinting at a reconsideration of the offending measures. 
The report that Pitt had accepted office had already 
been received with enthusiasm in America, and, in 
spite of their disappointment at its contradiction, the 
colonists augured well from the fall of Grenville. The 
chief difficulty lay in the obstinacy of the King ; but 
Rockingham at last, by the promise of a Declaratory 
Bill, which should assert the abstract right of the 
Crown in Parliament to make laws for the colonies 
in all cases, succeeded in procuring his consent to the 
introduction of repeal. As a matter of fact, the 
House of Commons had never taken any warm 
interest in the Stamp Act. It had been a purely 
Ministerial measure, accepted without a thought of 
its consequences ; and the motion for repeal was 
voted by a majority of over a hundred. In the 
Lords there was some difficulty. A series of hostile 
conditions, breathing fire and slaughter against the 
colonists, were moved by Lord Bottetort, a creature 
of Bute, and supported by the great authority of 
Lord Mansfield. The House readily passed the 
Declaratory Bill, in spite of an eloquent opposition 
by Lord Camden ; but the second reading of the 
repealing measure was only carried by a majority of 



2l6 THE king's friends 

twelve, and both on the committal and the third 
reading numerous protests were entered. But the 
popular enthusiasm which greeted the royal assent to 
the measure was an unmistakable index of the 
feelings of the nation ; and it is, perhaps, worthy a 
passing notice that, in the statute roll, the repealing 
statute takes precedence of the formal Declaratory 
Act. 

It was not, however, to be supposed, that the King 
would tolerate, for a single day longer than necessity 
compelled him, the existence of a Ministry which 
had thus humbled his pride ; and it is with a deep 
sense of pain that the admirers of Pitt are compelled 
to own, that he it was who rendered possible the 
change which followed. Even before the adjourn- 
ment of Parliament, in April, 1766, Grafton resigned 
office. It is but fair to him to state that he had con- 
sistently maintained that, without Pitt, no Adminis- 
tration could be really strong ; but this excuse 
hardly justified him in deserting a Ministry of 
which, knowing of Pitt's refusal to join it, he had 
become a member but a few months before. Rocking- 
ham induced the Duke of Richmond to take his place ; 
and the Ministry succeeded, before the end of the 
session, in passing a resolution declaring the illegality 
of General Warrants. But they gave still further 
offence to the King by refusing to ask the House for 
a grant for his younger brother, and when Parliament 
rose, on June 6th, it was well understood that the life 
of the Ministr}^ depended solely on the inability of 
the Kine to induce others to become their successors. 
The final blow came in July, when Northington, the 



PITT IN OFFICE 21 "J 

Chancellor, with almost unexampled treachery, sought 
a private interview with the King, and persuaded 
him to dismiss his (the Chancellor's) own colleagues, 
at the same time offering to be the bearer of a 
message to Pitt. By this proceeding he earned for 
himself a place in the new Ministry, and the just 
contempt of his own and subsequent times. 

It is possible, and due weight must be given to 
the possibility, that Pitt believed the King to be 
honestly willing to entrust real power to the hands 
of his responsible Ministers. His position at the 
time was certainly one of undeserved neglect. He 
had refused office at the fall of the Grenville Ministry 
solely because Temple declined to join him. Since 
that refusal, Temple, instead of reciprocating the 
great sacrifice made by his brother-in-law, had 
openly sided with his own brother, Grenville, on the 
American question.^ On one of the most important 
subjects of the day. Temple and Pitt were therefore 
at daggers drawn. Pitt had no Quixotic contempt 
of office, and he must have felt that he had been 
cheated out of a glorious opportunity which lay ready 
to his hand. As has been said, he had allowed him- 
self to use the language of the Court with respect to 
the iniquities of party government. His loyalty to 
his former friends was shown by the generous offer 
which he made to Temple of the most dignified place 
in the new Administration. But Temple would be 
content with nothing less than an equal share of 

* Very characteristically, Temple had celebrated the reconciliation 
by presenting his brother with a sum of ;^i,ooo. {Grenville Papers, 
iii. p. 227.) 



2l8 THE king's friends 

power ; and Pitt, who, not unnaturally, considered 
that the man entrusted with the task of naming a 
Ministry should be its real head, refused the demand, 
and thus lost the last chance of forming a really 
powerful Government. 

Thus was formed that ill-fated Ministry which, 
though sanctioned by the great name of Pitt, was 
destined to take its place in history as one of the 
most disastrous in our annals. The Whig doctrines 
of independence and liberality were represented by 
the Duke of Grafton, the nominal head of the 
Government, by Camden, who became Chancellor, 
and by Conway, who retained his office of Secretary 
of State. The traitor Northington was President of 
the Council. The other secretaryship of State was 
given to Shelburne, a nobleman who posed as a 
warm admirer of Pitt, and who professed to share his 
leader's present distrust of party connection, but 
whose undoubted abilities were heavily discounted 
by the fact that no one believed in his honesty. But 
the strangest feature in this ill-assorted combination 
was the fact that the leadership of the House of 
Commons, with the increasingly important office of 
Chancellor of the Exchequer, was reserved, not for 
Pitt, nor even for Conway, but for Charles Towns- 
hend, a brilliant young aristocrat who treated politics 
as a game of plunder, and who, having served under 
Newcastle and Rockingham, and offered to serve 
under Grenville, was now equally prepared to take 
office under a statesman whose avowed object was 
to break down the Newcastle and Rockingham 
system, and who had destroyed the policy of 



WS RETIREMENT 2ig 

Grenville. For Pitt himself, to the astonishment 
and dismay of his supporters, and the keen delight 
of his enemies, insisted on retiring to the Lords as 
Earl of Chatham, professing that the state of his 
health did not permit him to face the ordeal of 
the House of Commons, or to undertake official 
duties more onerous than those of the Privy 
Seal. 

The conduct of Pitt (or, as we must now call h'im, 
Chatham) at this point, and during the next few 
years, has long been a mystery. As is well known, 
he retired almost immediately from active politics, 
and left his distracted colleagues^to plunge deeper 
and deeper into the mire. Ill-health was alleged, 
and doubtless with some reason, as the cause of this 
strange conduct. But it is clear that his malady was 
at least as much mental as physical. Like Pulteney 
before him, he had been trapped into a false position ; 
and remorse and disappointment preyed upon his 
mind. Long years afterwards he urged, with pas- 
sionate vehemence, that he had been betrayed by the 
flattering assurances of the King, that he had dis- 
covered, almost immediately on entering office, that 
the secret influence which had undermined Grenville 
and Rockingham, still continued, and was intended 
by the King to continue, to guide the affairs of the 
nation. But nothing save an overweening confidence 
in his own powers, or a deplorable want of insight, 
could have led him to such a position. He was no 
child in politics. He had experienced once before 
the utter impossibility of standing alone against the 
forces of corruption and combination. The glittering 



220 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

bait had been dangled before his eyes. He was 
tempted, and he fell. 

The results were disastrous, not only to Chatham's 
reputation, but to his country. Left to his own de- 
vices, Townshend could think of no better plan of heal- 
ing the American sore than an addition to the existing 
Customs' duties. It should be noted that the 
Rockingham Ministry had not procured the repeal 
of Grenville's Customs Act, which, by a curious 
irony of fate, remained on the statute book until the 
year 1867. But Townshend gaily proposed to go far 
beyond Grenville's modest scheme, and, with the 
complete approval of the King's friends, introduced 
and carried an Act imposing additional duties on 
glass, paper, red and white lead, painters' colours, and 
tea. His death followed almost immediately after 
this event ; but his policy was ably continued by his 
successor, L>ord North, in whom at last the King 
found a Minister after his own heart. The machinery 
of the Customs' House was elaborated and extended 
to the colonies. The Constitution of New York was 
suspended, on the plea that the colony had not obeyed 
the provisions of an Act requiring it to provide 
quarters for British troops. In 1767 the enforcement 
of the new legislation was taken away from the 
ordinary colonial courts, and vested in the prerogative 
tribunals of vice-admiralty, which were being rapidly 
established in America, and which knew nothing of 
such trifles as the common law and trial by jury. 
The total revenue returns from this suicidal policy 
averaged ;^ 1,000 a year, while the valuable American 
trade almost entirely disappeared. 




Copyright:^ [-^Vr Benjamin Stone. 

STATUE OF LORD MANSFIELD (l705-I793). ST. STEPHEN'S HALL, 

WESTMINSTER. 

By E. H. Bailey, R. A. 



222 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

Meantime, another embarrassing question had 
been revived by the reappearance of Wilkes. Re- 
turning to England in the spring of the year 1768, 
he surrendered on the judgment of outlawry, and 
was tried on the original charges of libel. Lord 
Mansfield, making no allowance for the sufferings 
which the accused had already undergone, sentenced 
him to two heavy fines of ;^5CO each, in respect of 
No. 45 and the Essay on Woman, ordered him to 
be imprisoned for ten months on the first charge 
and twelve months on the latter (the sentences to 
run consecutively), and finally, to furnish heavy bail 
for his good behaviour for seven years after the 
expiry of his imprisonment. Wilkes at once peti- 
tioned the House of Commons upon his privilege, 
he having before his trial been elected member for 
Middlesex ; and in his petition boldly alleged that 
the records of the proceedings had been altered by 
Lord Mansfield without his consent, and that the 
solicitor to the Treasury, Philip Webb, had suborned 
witnesses at the trial. Lord North skilfully turned 
the motion for privilege into a shape calculated to 
raise the strongest prejudice against the petitioner ; 
and then, having procured its rejection by a large 
majority, insisted on confining further proceedings 
to an examination of the allegations against Lord 
Mansfield and Webb. Whilst these proceedings were 
pending in the Commons, the House of Lords, at 
the instigation of Lord Mansfield himself, contemptu- 
ously rejected an appeal brought by Wilkes against 
the judgment of the King's Bench, though it raised 
the very debatable question of the legality of 



THE WILKES LIBELS 223 

criminal informations for libel ; and, on the resump- 
tion of the proceedings in the Commons, the House, 
having brushed aside the allegations against Lord 
Mansfield and Webb, proceeded further to convict 
Wilkes, on his own confession, of a third libel, written 
after his return from abroad, in the pages of the St. 
James's Chronicle. 

Having thus, as they held, furnished themselves 
with evidence of offences committed by Wilkes, not 
only during the previous Parliament (which might be 
alleged to be purged by his sentence in the King's 
Bench), but in the existing session, the majority pro- 
ceeded to pass a fresh resolution of expulsion. The 
occasion was remarkable for the delivery of a masterly 
speech by Grenville, who, in complete defiance of his 
attitude in 1763, urged upon the House the illegality 
and impropriety of the step. After making a dignified 
apology for his change of views, Grenville pointed 
out that the motion alleged four grounds of complaint 
against Wilkes — the libel in No. 45, the Essay on 
Woman^ the existence of the sentence of imprison- 
ment, which would necessarily incapacitate him from 
attending the House for a period of sixteen months, 
and, finally, the new libel on Lord Weymouth in the 
St. James's Chronicle. He dwelt upon the injustice 
of this cumulation of charges, made in the hope of 
catching votes on different grounds ; and then showed 
that not one of .the charges taken singly would justify 
the motion, and that, therefore, all four taken together 
could not do so. For the two first libels Wilkes had 
been expelled from the previous Parliament ; and it 
was in defiance of all precedent to continue a sentence 



224 ^^^ king's friends 

of expulsion after a General Election. The sentence 
of imprisonment, he also showed by an appeal to 
precedent, was no bar to membership. The fourth 
charge had never been proved in a court of law, and 
could not, therefore, be the subject of proceedings 
in the House. Finally, the speaker dwelt, with pro- 
phetic foresight, on the extreme unwisdom of con- 
verting Wilkes into a popular hero, pointed out the 
obvious fact that nothing would please the accused 
better than a sentence of expulsion, which he had 
obviously courted by his arrogant demeanour, and 
suggested that, by the course proposed, the House 
would commit itself to a conflict with the electors, the 
end of which no man could foresee. 

Seldom has a prophecy been more rapidly fulfilled. 
The Middlesex electors at once took up Wilkes' 
cause. A meeting called by his opponents at the 
King's Arms was mobbed ; an Address which was on 
its way to the King was captured and its attendants 
insulted, while a hostile demonstration forced its way 
into the precincts of St. James ; the Ministerial candi- 
date at the new election was so terrified that he 
withdrew his nomination, and Wilkes was triumphantly 
re-elected. Thereupon the House, by an overwhelming 
majority, after expressions by Lord North so out- 
rageous that even he was compelled to retract them, 
declared Wilkes incapable of sitting in the present 
Parliament, and ordered a writ for a fresh election. 
For a second time Wilkes was re-elected without 
opposition. To rescue the House from what was 
now becoming an intolerable position, Colonel 
Luttrell, who had already distinguished himself by 



TRIUMPH OF WILKES 225 

his violent speeches against Wilkes in Parliament, 
resigned his seat for Bossiney, and came forward as 
Wilkes' opponent in Middlesex. The act required 
considerable courage ; but Luttrell was warmly sup- 
ported by the Ministers, who took special precautions 
to protect him, and on the poll he managed to secure 
296 votes, Wilkes receiving 1,143. The sheriffs, of 
course, returned Wilkes once more as duly elected ; 
but the House ordered them to attend with the 
polling books, and then, in spite of another very able 
speech from Grenville, declared Luttrell to be entitled 
to the seat. 

Things had fallen out exactly as Grenville had 
predicted. The illegal declaration of the House, that 
Wilkes was incapable of sitting, had rendered it 
almost inevitable that it should take the further and 
equally unprecedented step of awarding the seat to 
a man whom the constituency had definitely rejected. 
The persecution of Wilkes had raised a worthless 
demagogue to the highest pinnacle of popularity, and 
fostered a spirit of turbulence which, in the critical 
condition of American affairs, was disastrous to 
moderation and unanimity. Wilkes was elected an 
alderman of London, and shortly afterwards sheriff; 
and his hand is plainly to be seen in the hostile 
attitude of London, not merely towards the King 
and Ministry, but towards the House of Commons. 
In the year 1770 the House came into open collision 
with the City over an Address presented to the King 
by the Corporation, which led to a scene of un- 
precedented violence in the presence of the King 
himself Chatham, who had definitely resigned office 

16 



226 THE king's FRIENDS 

in October, 1768, though he despised Wilkes' cha- 
racter and pretensions, threw the whole weight of 
his eloquence on the side of popular liberties. In 
the year 1769 there commenced, over the famous 
signature of "Junius," a series of criticisms, of intense 
virulence and singular skill, on the various members 
of the Administration ; and the temper of the nation 
was clearly shown in the refusal of the jury to con- 
vict Woodfall, the publisher of a peculiarly violent 
attack on the King. The last act of humiliation in 
the struggle between Wilkes and his persecutors 
came in the year 1782, when the House formally 
expunged the resolutions of 1769 from its journals; 
and Wilkes, who had in 1774 once more been 
returned for Middlesex, and shortly afterwards 
elected Lord Mayor of London, finally triumphed 
over his enemies. 

Long before this date, however, events of momentous 
importance had taken place in the quarrel with the 
American colonies. In the spring of 1768, Lord 
Hillsborough, whose office of President of the Board 
of Trade had been converted into a Secretaryship 
of State for the Colonies, entered upon a renewed 
course of hostilities. In spite of the fact that the 
Assembly of New York had held out the olive branch, 
by voluntarily voting a sum of money as a free gift 
to the Crown, the Secretary of State issued strongly- 
worded circulars to the Governors of the colonies, 
requiring them to take action against the Assembly 
of Massachusetts, which had been foremost in its 
assertions of colonial independence. In August, Sir 
Jeffrey Amherst the Governor of Virginia, who had 




FREDERICK, LORD NORTH (1733-I792). 
Portrait by Nathaniel Dance. 



228 



earnestly but secretly advised against the passing of 
the Stamp Act, was rudely dismissed from his office, 
and replaced by Lord Bottetort, a well-known advo- 
cate of extreme measures. Troops were hastily sent 
out, and Governor Bernard, of Massachusetts, who 
knew the folly of provoking the colonists by a display 
of force, was severely reprimanded for his endeavours 
to soothe the hostile feelings of the Americans. In the 
autumn session of 1768-9, both Houses of Parliament 
adopted an Address to the Crown which contained 
the atrocious suggestion, that colonists accused of 
treason should be brought for trial to England, under 
the provision of an obscure and obsolete statute of the 
reign of Henry VHI. The news of these steps was, 
not unnaturally, received with boundless indignation 
in America, and war seemed to be imminent. 

But just at this moment (January, 1770) there 
appeared a faint glimmer of hope. Grafton, who had 
made himself unpopular by a scandalous connection 
with a woman, resigned office ; and the King offered 
the position of First Minister to Lord North, the 
Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is clear from the 
letter which he sent to North, that the King 
had no intention of making a complete change of 
Ministry ; but some of Chatham's friends, amongst 
them Camden and Conway, took the opportunity 
of resigning, and their places were filled by 
the least reputable of the Bedford Whigs, such 
as Sandwich, Gower, and Rigby. The Ministry of 
Lord North is also noteworthy as the scene of the 
first appearance in office of Charles James Fox, a 
younger son of the first Lord Holland, who was made 



POLICY OF NORTH 229 

a junior Lord of the Treasury, and who, for the next 
two or three years, steadily and with great effect, 
opposed every popular measure brought forward in 
Parliament.! North himself seems to have owed his 
first promotion to the friendship of Newcastle, and to 
the fact that his father had been in the service of the 
father of the King ; and his political sentiments may, 
therefore, be supposed to have been divided between 
the views of the Whigs and those of the King's friends. 
At first, he inclined towards a liberal attitude on 
important questions. On the 5th of March he intro- 
duced and ultimately carried a Bill to repeal all the 
duties imposed by Townshend's famous Act, with the 
single exception of the duty of threepence a pound 
on tea ; drawing a plausible distinction between 
articles manufactured in England, any diminution in 
which would be injurious to English trade, and 
articles which, like tea, were merely imported from 
elsewhere. He also formally announced the intention 
of the Government not to attempt to levy any 
revenue from the colonies beyond that yielded by the 
tea duties. He further expressed a qualified approval 
of a thoroughly useful measure introduced by Gren- 
ville, to transfer the decision of election petitions from 
a committee of the whole House, in which the votes 
inevitably went on party lines, to a more or less 
independent committee, chosen by ballot at the 
commencement of each session. 

* His sentiments at this time may be gathered from a letter which 
he addressed in August, 1771, to George Selwyn, in which he com- 
plains that he finds Clarendon a tedious author, but "hates the 
opposite party so much that it gives one a kind of partiality for him." 
{Selwyii Letters, iii. p, 11.) 



230 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

But the royal influence was too strong to be 
resisted by a man like North, who owed his position 
entirely to Court influence. The tea duty itself had 
been retained, as North himself admitted, by his 
casting vote in the Cabinet ; and it can hardly be 
doubted that his decision was determined by the 
wishes of the King. The retention deprived the 
repealing Act of all its grace, for, as every one knew, 
if revenue had been the only purpose of its continuance, 
that end would have been easily obtained by collecting 
the duty on the passage of the tea through the English 
ports, whereas the English duty of a shilling on the 
same article had only recently been abandoned. The 
colonists, therefore, while relaxing their boycott in 
respect of duty-free articles, maintained the exclusion 
of tea ; and the sore still remained open. 

At this juncture an event, disastrous in its influence, 
and strongly suggestive of the levity and recklessness 
with which affairs of the greatest moment were 
then handled by public men, took place in England. 
Franklin, the well-known representative of American 
interests, had succeeded, no one exactly knows how, 
in obtaining several letters which had been written, in 
the strictest secrecy, by Hutchinson, the new Governor 
of Massachusetts, and 01iver,the Lieutenant-Governor, 
to Whately, a former secretaVy of Grenville, and a 
member of the House of Commons. These letters, 
written without reserve, commented freely on 
American affairs, and revealed a decided bias in 
the minds of the writers against the aspirations of the 
colonists. Franklin sent them to Boston under a 
somewhat specious request for secrecy, which was, of 




BENJAMIN FRANKLIN (1707-1790). 
Portrait by Duplessis, 



232 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

course, not observed. The letters were widely circu- 
lated in the colonies, and produced an indignation 
which took the shape of a petition for the recall of 
Hutchinson and Oliver. The conduct of Franklin 
can hardly be justified by any high standard of 
morality ; for it is clear that he knew the letters to 
have been written under strict pledge of confidence, 
and that he took advantage of the death of Whately, 
to whom they were addressed, to obtain them from 
an unsuspicious custodian. But it hardly became a 
Government, which habitually opened the corres- 
pondence of its opponents in the Post Office, to affect 
virtuous indignation against a man who had but 
followed the lessons learnt in his own experience of 
Government service. Yet this was the line adopted. 
Franklin was at once dismissed from his office of 
American Postmaster ; and when the petition of 
Massachusetts came before the Board of Trade, 
Wedderburn, the Solicitor-General, whose political 
apostasy was fresh in every one's mind, in the 
presence of a large audience of distinguished men, 
made a violent personal attack on Franklin, who 
stood silent and unmoved before him. After a 
moment's pause of astonishment, the audience burst 
into a wild passion of cheers and laughter, and the 
Board at once threw out the petition as " false, 
groundless, and scandalous." To the credit of Lord 
North it must be recorded that he, almost alone of 
the Englishmen present, realised the gravity of the 
moment. It is said that Franklin, returning to his 
house with a steady step, carefully removed and 
folded up the Court suit which he had been wearing, 



AMERICA AND THE TEA DUTY 233 

to lay it aside with the resolve that he would next 
assume it on the declaration of American Indepen- 
dence. It is certain that the event raised him to the 
highest point of enthusiasm in the minds of his 
fellow-countrymen, and that the whole weight of his 
immense influence was thenceforth bent towards 
separation. 

The merest trifle was now necessary to fire the 
mine ; and the occasion was served by an Act of the 
year 1773, which allowed the East India Company to 
export their tea direct to the colonies, instead of dis- 
posing of it to English merchants. The measure had 
been suggested by the Company itself, as part of a 
general scheme for relief of its pecuniary embarrass- 
ments. It is difficult to see exactly how it affected 
the colonists, who could not be compelled to buy tea 
against their wills. But the more ardent spirits saw 
in it a subtle attempt to break down the boycott. 
The tea would be imported by the Company's agents 
in America, and, being free of all but the threepenny 
duty, would be offered for sale cheaper than tea 
coming from any other source. Perhaps the leaders 
of the Republican party knew how futile it was to 
expect their fellow-countrymen to resist a bargain. 
At any rate, as is well known, they determined to 
resist the landing of the cargoes. Three ships in 
Boston harbour were boarded on December i6th by 
a party of disguised insurgents, and their contents 
thrown into the sea. News of the outrage provoked 
a violent feeling of hostility in England. The 
colonial ports were declared closed to British trade 
by Act of Parliament ; the Constitution of Massa- 



234 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

chusetts was once more suspended. The Assembly 
of the colony replied by a general summons to war. 
In April, 1775, was fought the battle of Lexington, 
and the fatal struggle began. 

It is not within the scope of this work to trace the 
progress of the American War of Independence. 
Its main outlines are well known. Until the close of 
the year 1776, it appeared barely possible that the 
British, in spite of the incapacity of their commanders, 
and the mismanagement of the Government, might 
be victorious. The difficulties with which Washington 
and the Congress had to contend were almost over- 
whelming. 1 ntercolonial jealousies, the strong loyalist 
feelings still prevailing in many districts, the total 
inexperience and the want of subordination in the 
American forces, the impossibility of procuring 
proper equipment for the troops, almost drove the 
leaders of the revolution to despair. But the brilliant 
capture of Trenton by Washington on Christmas 
night put new heart into the colonists, and the 
surrender of Burgoyne at Saratoga in the following 
year brought them the invaluable aid of F'rance. 
This latter event, indeed, stimulated the energies of 
Great Britain to a desperate resistance of her ancient 
foe, and rallied to the Government the powerful 
support of the dying Chatham, who, in a memorable 
scene, scornfully opposed the Duke of Richmond's 
proposal to recognise the independence of the 
colonies. Popular feeling, hitherto lukewarm as to 
the war, was raised to fever heat ; and at one time 
the British had no less than 300,000 men under arms. 
But the incapacity of Lord George Germaine at the 



AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE 235 

Colonial Office, and Lord Sandwich at the Admiralty, 
went far to neutralise the effects of the national 
enthusiasm. To the war with France was added in 
1779 a war with Spain, and in 1780 a war with 
Holland. In 1780 the so-called "Armed Neutrality" 
of Russia, Norway, and Sweden, for the purpose of 
checking the British naval operations, created a new 
feature of difficulty. Great Britain stood alone, 
hemmed in by a ring of foes. In the following year 
Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown, and all hope 
of retaining the colonies was at an end. A great 
revulsion of feeling took place, and in March of 
1782, after a final orgy of corruption, in which, under 
cover of a national loan, thousands of pounds of the 
public money were recklessly distributed among the 
supporters of the dyiiig Ministry, the King was com- 
pelled to accept the resignation of Lord North. The 
Treaty of Versailles,^ in 1783, formally acknowledged 
the independence of the colonies, released France 
from the obligation to demolish the fortifications of 
Dunkirk, restored to her Saint Lucia, Senegal, and 
her settlements in India, ceded to her Tobago and 
the fisheries on the north and west of Newfoundland, 
and gave back to Spain Minorca and the two 
Floridas. It was a humiliating contrast with the 
Treaty of Paris, made twenty years before, when 
Britain had assumed the lead of the world ; and it 
would have been far worse, but for the great victory 
of Rodney over De Grasse in the West Indies, in 

* The treaty between the United States and Great Britain was 
actually signed at Paris. But the settlement is usually described by 
the title of the instruments executed by France and Spain. 



236 THE king's friends 

i'j'^2, which had thrown a gleam of glory over the 
sinking fortunes of England. 

For this terrible series of disasters the King had 
been chiefly to blame. The publication in the year 
1867, of the long series of seven hundred letters 
written by him to North during the latter's tenure 
of office, most of them in the King's own hand, 
revealed the fact, that the whole responsibility, not 
merely for the main outlines, but for the minutest 
details of administration, in that gloomy period, rests 
with the monarch.^ He it was who refused to listen 
to suggestions of compromise, who obstinately per- 
sisted that, if only sufficient firmness were shown, the 
colonies must give way. In his view (how well we 
know this argument !) the sole reason for the insub- 
ordination of the colonies was the factious opposition 
of the Whigs, which encouraged them in their re- 
sistance. The excesses of the German mercenaries, 
the employment of the Indian savages, the insults 
heaped on the colonists by the royal officials, the 
contemptuous rejections of the colonial petitions, 
were matters which, to his mind, did not affect the 
question at all. It was his personal influence that 
maintained in office, solely because they were willing 
to act as his tools, Lord George Germaine, whose 
character he despised. Lord Sandwich, whose incapacity 
he knew, Suffolk and Wedderburn, whom all honest 



^ The concluding letters also show, pretty clearly, how the King's 
system was carried on. There are complaints that the bye-elections of 
1779-1781 have cost the Government ;!^72,ooo, while the pension list 
shocks even the King. {Correspondence of George III. and Lord 
Northy vol. ii. pp. 421-8.) 



PERSONAL GOVERNMENT 237 

men condemned, and Thurlow, whose coarseness and 
brutality disgusted even his friends. It was he, finally, 
who, in 1778, when all eyes turned to Chatham as the 
one hope of his country, refused to admit to his 
councils, even at the risk of revolution, the man who 
was, beyond all question, the foremost statesman of 
his day, because he knew that Chatham, having once 
tasted of the bitterness of personal government, would 
never submit to it again. To say that the colonies 
would, in the course of a few years, have inevitably 
claimed their independence, is but a poor excuse for 
the folly which drove them into revolt. Equally 
idle is it to point out, that the mother-country 
in the end gained more by the mighty develop- 
ment of independent America, than she lost by the 
abolition of an antiquated colonial system. It is 
impossible to disguise the fact, that the personal 
government of the King sank Great Britain from the 
highest pinnacle of terrestrial glory to the depths of 
degradation, dismembered the Empire, and begot in 
the hearts of a great nation a feeling of distrust and 
soreness towards the mother-country which, after the 
lapse of more than a century, has hardly yet passed 
away. 

It is, however, some consolation to feel, that this 
long and melancholy period was not entirely without 
events which can be said to have marked a distinct 
advance in freedom and good government. In the 
year 1771, another episode connected with the name 
of Wilkes established for ever the publicity of Parlia- 
mentary debates. The growing influence of the Press 
had long been viewed with anxious eyes by those 



238 THE king's friends 

who were unfavourable to popular influence ; and the 
publication, under thin disguise, of the proceedings in 
Parliament, was regarded with special dislike. There 
were good reasons why many members of the House 
of Commons, in particular, should deprecate publicity 
for their conduct. In the earlier part of the century, 
the matter had been frequently discussed ; and a 
Standing Order of the House had (as we have said) 
been directed against the practice. It is needless to 
point out, that a precaution which, in the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries, had been necessary to 
protect the House against royal pressure, had become 
meaningless in the changed conditions of the times. 
Whoever might be kept in ignorance of the pro- 
ceedings in Parliament, it was quite certain that 
the King would know every detail. The more 
sensible members of the House were willing to 
tolerate a practice which, so long as it was not 
openly legalised, could be kept within due bounds. 
But Colonel George Onslow, the " little cocking 
George " of Junius' bitter invective, indignant at 
reflections on his own unimportant person, deter- 
mined to test the matter. Accordingly, having 
annoyed the House on various occasions by insisting 
on the gallery being cleared, he took the further step, 
in February, 1771, of moving for the production of 
two newspapers containing, as he said, misrepre- 
sentations of his own speeches. Having succeeded 
in his object, he then procured an order for the 
attendance of the printers, Thompson and Wheble, 
and, when they failed to appear, for their arrest. 
This order was more readily made than executed ; 



PUBLICITY OF DEBATES 239 

and, though it was actually supported by a Royal 
Proclamation, Wheble, from his safe retreat in Pater- 
noster Row, boldly defied the authority of the House. 
Apprehensive of consequences, however, he procured 
himself to be arrested under the Proclamation by a 
friend, and brought before the sitting Alderman at 
Guildhall, who proved to be no other than the famous 
Wilkes himself Wilkes, having gravely listened to 
the charge, not only dismissed the accusation against 
Wheble, but bound the latter over to prosecute 
Carpenter, the friendly accuser, for illegal arrest. A 
similar course was adopted by Thompson, except 
that, in his case. Alderman Oliver contributed another 
item of comedy to the proceedings, by granting to 
Thompson's friendly assailant a certificate of con- 
formity with the Proclamation, under which he lodged 
a claim for the reward of £^0 offered by that document. 
At length a real arrest was effected of a third printer, 
one Miller, by a messenger of the House of Commons ; 
but, before the messenger could escape from the City 
with his prey, he was given into custody for assault, 
brought before the Lord Mayor, and committed for 
trial at the next Quarter Sessions. 

Summoned to the House to answer for his conduct^ 
the Lord Mayor (Crosby) made a triumphal procession 
from the City, and, on being admitted, insisted upon 
taking his place, not at the bar. but in his seat as a 
member. Being interrogated, he boldly vindicated 
his position as guardian of the City's liberties. Having 
already had sufficient experience of the difficulty of 
overawing Wilkes, the House allowed the proceedings 
against him to drop ; but Alderman Oliver was 



240 THE KINGS FRIENDS 

subsequently summoned to appear, and finally, after 
lengthy debates, and tumults within and without the 
Plouse, Crosby and Oliver were committed to the 
Tower, where, until the end of the session, they lived 
in great comfort at the expense of the City, being 
visited by the leading members of the Opposition, and 
treated as popular heroes. The ridiculous result of this 
attempt to enforce the privilege of secrecy virtually 
gave the death-blow to the privilege itself, and, except 
on rare occasions, it has not since been enforced. ^ 

For another step of a decidedly progressive 
character the Government, and not the Opposition, 
are entitled to the full praise. The publicity of 
Parliamentary Debates was secured in the teeth of 
the most violent resistance of the King's friends ; but 
the Quebec Act of 1774 was carried by Ministers 
against the strong remonstrances of the Opposition. 
The occasion was the fixing of the boundaries of the 
great province of Canada, acquired by the Peace of 
Paris in 1763. Shortly after that date, a Royal 
Proclamation had introduced English law (and there- 
with, of course, the penal restrictions on Catholics 2) 
into the newly acquired territory, and at the same time 
announced that the Governor had been authorised, 

' A curious survival of the obsolete theory lingered for some time in 
the refusal to provide proper accommodation for the representatives of 
the Press. It would have been too absurd for the House of Commons 
to deny the existence of a right for the exercise of which they had 
actually made provision. 

2 The Treaty of Paris had expressly stipulated for toleration of the 
Canadian Catholics ; but apparently this stipulation had been treated 
in a very narrow sense. At any rate, the Catholic clergy were very 
uneasy about their possessions. 



ENGLISH LA W IN CANADA 24 1 

in due time, to summon a Representative Assembly 
on the model of those existing in the other American 
colonies. But the scheme was totally unsuited to the 
circumstances of the colony. The great bulk of the 
inhabitants were of French descent. They cared 
nothing for English notions of political freedom ; but 
they cared a great deal for their religion, which was 
Roman Catholic. The new measure availed itself 
skilfully of a religious concession to abolish political 
liberty. It introduced a scheme of what we should 
call Crown Colony government by a nominated 
council ; and the levying of taxation was expressly 
reserved to the Home Government, while the English 
jury system, which was quite alien to French ideas, 
was only continued for criminal cases. But the 
Roman Catholic religion was definitely recognised, 
if not actually established ; and thus the newly 
acquired province was pacified at a critical moment, 
and virtually saved from annexation by the insurgent 
colonies in the War of Independence. It would be 
ungenerous to detract from the merit of the King and 
his advisers in this measure by pointing out, that the 
scheme roused the fiercest hostility in the adjoining 
Puritan colonies of New England. But this fact 
must, in equal fairness, be held to justify much of the 
dislike manifested toward it by the Opposition. The 
growth of religious toleration is also shown by the 
passage in 1778 of Sir George Savile's Act, which 
repealed some of the worst restrictions imposed on 
Catholics by the policy of the Restoration ^ ; and, 

^ Roman Catholic priests were no longer to be liable to prosecution 
merely as such, Catholic schools were to be allowed, and Catholics 

17 



242 ■ THE king's FRIENDS 

though the bigoted temper of the nation was shown 
by the disgraceful Gordon Riots in 1780, the firm 
conduct of the King on that occasion is worthy of all 
praise. To Lord North, and not to the King, belongs 
the credit of the conciliatory measures adopted, in 
spite of a disgraceful exhibition of commercial 
jealousy, towards Ireland in 1778, hereafter to be 
explained. It would be unjust moreover to forget, 
though an account of this measure also must be 
reserved for the next chapter, the great statute of the 
year 1773 which, for the first time, extended the 
control of the Government to the vast territories 
acquired by the East India Company, and established 
a Supreme Court of Justice, on the English model, at 
Calcutta. Finally, a word must be said of the con- 
spicuous services of Lord Mansfield in the cause of 
justice during his long tenure of office, as Chief of the 
King's Bench, from 1756 to 1788. Though Mansfield 
was an uniform supporter of the King's views in 
regard to the colonies, though he strained the law to 
the utmost against Wilkes' supporters, by refusing to 
allow juries to pronounce upon the character of an 
alleged libel, yet his name is associated with more 
than one of the judicial decisions upon which the 
freedom of the subject is so largely based. In the 
year 1772, in Summei'sett' s Case, he pronounced boldly 
that the status of slavery was unknown to the law of 
England, and that a negro, the moment he set foot on 
English soil, was a free man. In Mostyn v. Fabiigas 

were permitted to acquire landed property by purchase or inheritance. 
Those who claimed the privileges of the Act were, however, compelled 
to take a very severe oath of allegiance. 



JUSTICE IN ENGLAND ' 243 

(1774) he allowed a resident in Minorca to sue the 
Governor of the dependency, after his return to Eng- 
land, for a wrong alleged to have been committed 
during his term of office. In Campbell v. Hall (in 
the same year) he pronounced it unlawful for the 
Crown, after having once granted representative 
institutions to a colony, to attempt to impose taxes 
on it by Letters Patent. Above all, by his luminous 
perception of the principles of law, he adopted into the 
English system many of the leading rules of that 
vague body of tradition and usage which, under the 
name of the Law Merchant, had long exercised a very 
real, though somewhat precarious control, over the 
conduct of commerce. He thus not only strengthened 
immensely the reputation and power of the Common 
Law Courts, but did much to rescue the common 
law itself from the lethargy into which it had sunk, 
and to adapt it to the requirements of a rapidly 
extending commerce. All these incidents show, that 
the spirit of progress and liberty, though obscured by 
the passions of the tim.e, and the prejudices of a 
narrow scheme of Government, was yet, even in the 
dark years 1 770-1 782, making good its position in 
the heart of the social system, and preparing the way 
for triumphs in the future. 



IX 



RKVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 



The two years which followed the fall of Lord 
North, though at first sight one dreary struggle 
between intriguing rivals, are in truth hardly equalled 
for importance in the political history of the Empire. 
During this short period, a new era in the world's 
fortunes dawned with the recognised independence 
of the United States ; the future importance and 
character of Canada were decided by the immigration 
of the American loyalists from the south ; the rela- 
tions between England and Ireland assumed an 
entirely new phase ; the dual system of government 
in British India, which lasted until the Mutiny of 
1857, was established ; great reforms in the public 
service, and a new financial policy, marked the 
revolt against the old system of corrupt influence in 
domestic politics ; the great question of Parlia- 
mentary Reform acquired a definite basis ; and, finally, 
an intense struggle, between the Ministry and the 
Opposition in the House of Commons, resulted in the 
establishment of the last great principle upon which 



ATTITUDE OF ROCKINGHAM 245 

the Cabinet System is based. It is worth while to 
examine with some care the history of these two 
memorable years. 

The acknowledged leader of the party which, for 
so long, had protested against the system of govern- 
ment by royal influence, was Lord Rockingham. 
Against Rockingham himself, even the King had no 
personal complaint to urge ; but George hated him 
as the representative of a system and a policy which 
he detested, and it was only the reluctant conviction 
that no other course was possible, which finally over- 
came his repugnance, and induced him to entrust the 
Whig leader with the formation of a government. In 
the circumstances, the task was no easy one ; for the 
royal influence, though it had received a severe blow, 
was still powerful, and Rockingham knew that it 
would be employed to countermine his policy. Of 
that policy, he had made no secret. It comprised a 
frank recognition of the independence of the thirteen 
colonies, a thorough reform of the corrupt influence 
of the Treasury, and a generous treatment of the 
claims of Ireland. 

Unhappily for the prospects of the new Cabinet, 
Rockingham's choice of colleagues was by no means 
so decided as his policy. In Lord John Cavendish he 
gained a thoroughly honest and faithful, if not a very 
competent. Chancellor of the Exchequer ; in Charles 
James Fox a brilliant if somewhat unscrupulous 
Leader of the House of Commons ; in Camden a 
President of the Council of great popular reputation ; 
in Burke (who was not, however, of the Cabinet) a 
follower of real genius and exceptional loyalty and 



246 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

honesty ; and in Grafton a great Whig nobleman, 
who, though his reputation was somewhat tarnished, 
and his poHtical creed unstable, might yet be counted 
a valuable ally. But, yielding to the pressure put 
upon him by the King, he made the fatal mistake of 
accepting two men who should never have been 
admitted to his councils. One of them was Shelburne, 
who shared with Fox the Secretaryship of State, 
the other Thurlow, who retained his great office 
of Chancellor. Shelburne was indeed a professed 
Whig ; but he openly boasted those views of which 
Chatham had so bitterly repented, and was always 
eager to disavow all party connections at the bidding 
of the King, and he laboured, as has been said, under 
the most fatal defect in a statesman, a total inability 
to convince any one of his honesty, even as honesty 
is understood in politics. Thurlow was an avowed 
Tory, who, for the next ten years, indulged himself 
in the malicious pleasure of wrecking, or trying to 
wreck, every Government of which he formed a part, 
until he was finally extinguished by the resolute hand 
of the younger Pitt. As Mr. Lecky points out, there 
seems to have been at this time a mischievous theory, 
that a Lord Chancellor was, as such, exempt from 
the ordinary ties of political allegiance ; and it is, 
indeed, difficult to account otherwise for the way 
in which Northington, Thurlow, Loughborough, and 
Eldon were allowed to play fast and loose with 
successive Ministries. But the theory cannot be 
justified by any sound view of politics. The splendid 
reward of the Chancellorship is, and always has been, 
given almost entirely for political services ; and the 




Photo by'\ [ Walker &= Cockerell 

LORD SHELBURNE (1737-1805). 

Portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



248 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

assumption, by the occupant of the woolsack, of a 
superior privilege resting on vast legal attainments, 
is, in the majority of cases, quite unwarranted by the 
facts. 

It may well be doubted whether, if the choice had 
been left to them, the Ministry would have selected 
the subject of Ireland for their first essay in reform. 
But the choice was not left them. On the very day 
on which they accepted office. Colonel Luttrell drew 
attention in the House to the alarming news from 
the island ; and his mysterious warning was immedi- 
ately emphasized by Sir William Eden, the Chief 
Secretary to the retiring Lord Lieutenant, the Earl 
of Carlisle. Lord Carlisle had been dismissed, with 
scant courtesy, to make way for the Duke of Port- 
land ; and Eden, who happened to be in England 
when the recall was announced, determined to revenue 
his chief by stating in Parliament news which he 
ought, undoubtedly, to have first disclosed to the 
Secretary of State. In order to understand the 
gravity of the crisis which he reported, it is necessary 
to glance at the relations which had subsisted between 
England and Ireland during the previous period. 

The policy adopted towards Ireland at the Revolu- 
tion may be summed up in three phrases — Protestant 
ascendency in political and civil life, complete sub- 
ordination to the commercial interests of England, 
government by corruption. It was a curious policy 
for a nation whose political rulers professed to believe 
in religious and civil freedom, and popular approval ; 
and it can only be explained, not justified, by the 
fact of the total difference of circumstances between 



REPRESSION IN IRELAND 249 

the two countries. The determined resistance offered 
by Ireland to the Revolution settlement had been 
inspired chiefly by religious and political hatred ; and 
the victorious Whigs hardly felt any inconsistency in 
violating their own fundamental professions in their 
dealings with the conquered country. The vast 
majority of the population was Catholic ; and a reign 
of terror placed the lives and fortune of the Catholics 
at the mercy of the Protestant minority which had 
supported William. The celebration of Catholic 
worship was forbidden, the Catholic gentry were 
debarred from purchasing or inheriting land, and a 
horrible system of rewarding converts with the for- 
feited estates of their Catholic kinsmen was introduced. 
Catholics were forbidden to teach in schools ; they 
were not allowed to possess arms for self-defence ; 
they were excluded from the learned professions ; 
finally, they were deprived of such poor shadow 
of Parliamentary representation as they nominally 
enjoyed, by being disqualified for the exercise of the 
franchise. 

In commercial matters, the iron hand of England 
fell on Protestant and Catholic alike. The strins^ent 
exclusiveness of the Navigation Acts treated Ireland 
as a foreign country, and barred to her the colonial 
trade. The jealousy of the English cloth manu- 
facturers procured an absolute restriction on the 
traffic in Irish wool, except between a few specified 
ports in Ireland and England. The old prohibition 
of 1665 against the import of Irish cattle into Eng- 
land was rigorously maintained. Even during the 
administration of Walpole, one article of foreign 



250 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

commerce after another — East India goods, hops, 
colonial sugars, glass — was excluded from Irish 
ports. The single Irish industry which received 
encouragement was the linen trade ; and it is greatly 
to be feared, that one at least of the motives for this 
singular deviation from an otherwise consistent 
policy of repression, was a desire to retaliate on the 
Scotch for their unwillingness to consent to the 
Union. 

English administration in Ireland was represented 
by the Executive at Dublin Castle, which, under the 
powers of Poynings' Acts, kept a tight hand on such 
faint legislative independence as the Irish Parliament 
was disposed to claim, and employed the scanty 
balance remaining in the Irish Exchequer, after the 
pensions and salaries of English favourites and 
absentee officials had been paid, in extending the 
Government interest among the Protestant popula- 
tion. But, in truth, there was, for more than half a 
century after the Revolution, little need for the arts 
of local management. The Irish House of Commons 
was the creature of the great Protestant landowners, 
who owned the bulk of the two hundred borough 
seats, and who were, many of them, English noblemen. 
The privileged caste relied entirely on the English 
protection, and were, naturally, but little disposed to 
criticise English administration. The greatness of the 
hereditary revenues of the Crown rendered frequent 
sessions of Parliament unnecessary. The Established 
Church was officered by bishops, most of whom were 
English, and many of them absentees ; the native 
Anglican clergy were ignorant and poor. The latter 




DEAN SWIFT (1667-1745). 

Portrait by Bindon. 



252 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

were also in a peculiar and not altogether undeserved 
position of hostility to their own flocks. A long 
struggle between the great landowners and the clergy 
on the subject of tithes had resulted, in 1735, in the 
virtual suppression of the tithes arising from pasture 
lands^; and, as the great bulk of the best land in Ireland 
was then devoted to pasturage, the unfortunate peasant 
who grew corn or potatoes on his one or two acres, 
found himself subjected to a burden, from which his 
far wealthier neighbours were free. 

The result of this iron system of repression may 
undoubtedly be claimed as favourable by those who 
urge, that a scheme of persecution,' if enforced with 
sufficient thoroughness and persistence, may produce 
tranquillity — for a time. By the end of the seven- 
teenth century, open opposition to the Protestant 
rule had almost disappeared, and, for the next fifty 
years, the political history of Ireland is well-nigh a 
blank. Occasional outbreaks of independence, such 
as that which, in 17 19, led to the passing of the 
statute declaring the right of the English Parliament 
to legislate for Ireland, and of the English House of 
Lords to hear Irish appeals, were easily put down. 
Even the famous storm aroused by " Wood's half- 
pence," in 1723-4, though it was successful in its 
immediate object, passed away, apparently without 
permanent results. But Ireland was slowly awaken- 
ing from the torpor of despair ; and the formation, in 
the year 1759, of the Catholic Association, led to a 
determined effort to remove some of the worst of her 

^ The so-called " tithe of agistment." 



LOYALTY OF IRISH CATHOLICS 253 

religious disabilities. A slight measure of relief was 
granted in 1 771, by an Act which allowed Catholics to 
acquire small portions of waste land for the purpose 
of reclamation. A somewhat vague measure in 1774 
enabled them to declare their loyalty to the Govern- 
ment, by taking an oath of allegiance of a special 
character. By a studied evasion of the laws which 
prohibited them carrying arms, the English recruiting 
agents, who found Ireland their most valuable hunt- 
ing ground, enlisted large numbers of Catholics in 
the regular army. But the real crisis came with the 
outbreak of the American War. To the grateful 
surprise of the Government, the Catholics of Ireland 
manifested an unbounded loyalty to the Crown, while 
the Ulster Presbyterians, who sympathised with the 
colonists, were lukewarm in their support As, how- 
ever, there was no real fear that the latter would 
oppose the Government, Ministers, in their desperate 
need of troops, ventured to employ abroad almost 
three quarters of the army usually maintained in 
Ireland ; whilst, in the year 1778, they determined to 
show their appreciation of Irish loyalty by removing 
not only religious but commercial restrictions to a 
substantial extent. In their commercial policy, they 
were foiled by the bitter hostility of the English 
merchants, who succeeded in excepting from the 
liberal measure of free trade proposed for Ireland the 
important items of wool, hats, glass, hops, gunpowder, 
and coals ; but in 1779 the restriction on the growth 
of Irish tobacco was removed, and in 1780 that on 
wool and glass. In their religious measures, which 
did not come before the British Parliament, they 



254 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

sanctioned the Bill brought forward in the Irish 
legislature by Gardiner, which allowed Catholics to 
acquire land, on leases for 999 years. 

A new and formidable influence now arose in Ire- 
land. The exigencies of the American War, and of 
the Continental wars which sprang out of it, had, as 
we have said, compelled the Government to denude 
the country almost entirely of troops. In the year 
1780, there was grave danger of a French invasion ; and 
the Government were wholly unprepared to meet it. 
They were even obliged, for want of funds, to abandon 
the attempt to raise a militia. In the crisis, a self- 
supporting organisation, known as " The Volunteers," 
sprang up all over Ireland, and with especial vigour in 
the Protestant North. The movement was, at first, 
conducted with the greatest regularity. The Volun- 
teers were men of substance and character, who 
resembled the fervent Puritans of Cromwell's New 
Model, rather than the professional soldiers of regular 
armies. They were mostly Protestant, for the laws 
against the carrying of arms by Catholics were still 
partly enforced ; but it was a significant fact, that 
the Catholics contributed largely to the cost of rations 
and uniforms. The officers were amongst the most 
honoured and conspicuous of the Protestant gentry. 
No one doubted their valour or their capacity ; and 
even the Government, though it declined to accord 
them any official recognition, in fact relied greatly 
upon their efforts for protection. 

Such an organisation, in such circumstances, could 
not fail to react on politics. The cause of Irish 
independence, which had recently found two fervid 



CATHOLIC RELIBF 255 

champions in Grattan and Flood, and judicious and 
more moderate supporters in such men as Yelverton 
and Lord Charlemont, caught fresh Hfe from the move- 
ment. An agitation sprang up for the repeal of the 
obnoxious Declaratory Act of 17 19 (p. 252), and the 
Privy Council clauses of Poynings' Act. An immediate 
effect was seen in the repeal, in 1781, of the Presby- 
terian Test, and the passing of an Irish Habeas 
Corpus Act. In February, 1782, in the last days of 
North's Ministry, a great meeting of the Volunteers 
at Dungannon pronounced decidedly in favour of 
Parliamentary Reform and religious equality ; and, 
on April i6th, on the motion of Grattan, the Irish 
House of Commons unanimously voted an Address 
to the Crown, praying for the repeal of the Declara- 
tory Act of 1 7 19. 

This was the situation which the Rockingham 
Ministry had to face on its entry upon office ; and it 
was clear that but one policy was possible. For the 
first time in her sad history, Ireland had spoken with 
an united voice ; and that voice was irresistible. 
With an European war still on her hands, with her 
resources exhausted, England was in no plight to 
enter upon a new conflict. Happily, the avowed 
principles of the Cabinet rendered a concession 
easy ; and it is to the credit of Fox, that the con- 
cession was made whole-heartedly and peacefully. 
On June 3rd, Fox in the Commons, and Shelburne 
in the Lords, moved resolutions promising a repeal 
of the Act of 17 19 and the obnoxious clauses of 
Poynings' Act, and suggesting a permanent treaty 
between the two countries, with regard to their future 



2S6 REVlt^AL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

relationship. With the single exception of Lord 
Loughborough, not a dissentient voice was raised. 
The repealing Act soon followed, and was received 
with universal joy in Ireland. In the Irish Parlia- 
ment, the necessary amendments of Poynings' Act 
were soon passed, and most of the remaining dis- 
abilities of the Catholics were removed. In spite of 
the grave opening for future misunderstanding left by 
the failure to carry into effect the resolution respect- 
ing future intercourse, and by some rather technical 
difficulties raised with respect to the wording ^ of 
the repealing Act, the great constitutional change of 
1782 was carried into effect ; and Ireland entered 
upon that short period of legislative independence 
which, in the opinion of good judges, is the brightest 
in the whole of her chequered story. 

Thus left free to turn their attention to home 
affairs, the new Ministry nobly redeemed their 
promises of reform, by introducing and carrying five 
great measures which have had a permanently whole- 
some effect on English politics. By the first, known 
as the Revenue Officers Act, the officials of the 
Excise, Customs, Stamps, Post Office, and Salt and 
Window Duties, to the number, it was said, of 60,000, 
were deprived of the Parliamentary franchise. If 
the numbers were even approximately correct, the 
measure removed a grave scandal ; for it is probable 

^ The advocates of "simple repeal" contended, that the mere 
repeal of the Act of 17 19 restored legislative and judicial independence 
to Ireland. Their opponents urged, that the Act of 1 7 19 was merely 
declaratory of the law, and that its mere repeal left the question 
legally open. They advocated "Renunciation"; and their wishes 
were gratified by an Act of the following session (1783). 



MEASURES OF REFORM 2<^'J 

that, at this time, the whole electorate did not exceed 
300,000, and it was well known that every revenue 
officer's vote was at the disposal of the Government 
of the day.i By the second, the Contractors' Act, the 
unwholesome practice of giving Government con- 
tracts to members of the House of Commons, which 
not only corrupted the House, but caused the 
greatest waste and inefficiency in the public service, 
was abolished. By the third, all creations of life 
offices in the colonial service were made for the 
future absolutely void ; and it was provided that 
all non-residents should vacate their appointments. 
The shifts to which the opponents of this measure 
were put may be guessed from the fact, that they had 
to resort to the argument, that its wording would 
offend the Americans, who might deem it to be a 
covert attack on their independence. The fourth 
was a long and complicated measure for the reform 
of the Paymaster's office, introduced by Burke. It 
abolished the scandalous practice which treated the 
Paymaster as a contractor with the State for the 
maintenance of the army, and enabled him to keep 
enormous balances in his hands for many years. All 
payments on account of the army were to be lodged 
at the Bank of England, and to be paid out directly 
to the persons by whom they were demanded, on 
drafts specifying precisely the service for which they 
were issued. The books of the Paymaster were to 

^ Considerable effect was produced in the House by the reading of a 
letter, signed " North," and addressed to a person who had promised 
to secure for the Government the votes of all the revenue officials in 
Newark. 

18 



258 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

belong to the office, not to the Paymaster. All the 
officials were to be paid by fixed salary ; and the 
fees of office, after payment of the office expenses, 
were to go to the fund for wounded officers. Finally, 
the pay for regiments was to be issued to the 
commanding officers, not according to the often 
defective " establishment," or nominal figures, but 
according to the actual muster rolls for the time 
being. The Pay Office Act is strong testimony to 
the honesty of its author, for it materially reduced 
the income of the post to which he had just 
been appointed, and it proved him to be of altogether 
different metal from the Hollands, the Rigbys, and the 
Welbore Ellis', under whose fostering care the nation 
had been defrauded of immense sums of money.^ 
But the great triumph of Burke's short period of 
office is his Civil List Reform Act, which introduced 
order and discipline into the royal household, strictly 
limited the pension list and the secret service fund, 
and, by the abolition of useless offices, effected a 
saving of ^^72,000 a year to the country. That such 
a measure was possible at all, was due to the persis- 
tent efforts of Burke, carried on during many years of 
Opposition. By his bold attacks, he had at last 
compelled North to issue a Royal Commission upon 
the whole of the public expenditure ; and the reports 
issued by the Commissioners in rapid succession 
during 1780 and the following years, had revealed a 

^ A private report laid on the table of the House during the follow- 
ing session calculated the amount of outstanding money due to the 
Treasury at the enormous sum of forty-four millions. Most of this 
represented balances in the hands of the Paymasters. 



PEACE NEGOTIATIONS 259 

state of confusion, corruption, inefficiency, and 
extravagance, before which even the King quailed, 
and which rendered reform a real national question. 

It is melancholy to record, that a Government 
which, in the course of a few weeks, had established 
such claims on the nation, was doomed to fall by 
intestine quarrels and Court influence. But the fact 
was only the natural result of the weakness of Rock- 
ingham, in admitting to office men who were known 
to be hostile to his principles. Shelburne had, from 
the very first, maintained towards his colleagues 
an attitude utterly inconsistent with loyalty to his 
nominal chief; and now, during the fatal illness of 
Rockingham, he and Fox came to an open rupture. 
In the reconstitution of the Secretary's office, con- 
sequent on the abolition of the Colonial Department, 
Home and Colonial affairs had been allotted to 
Shelburne, Foreign affairs to Fox. The great ques- 
tion of diplomacy at the time was, of course, the 
question of peace. This question involved negotia- 
tions, not only with France and Spain, but with 
Franklin, now the representative of the United States 
in Paris. The independence of America was openly 
admitted ; and, early in the session. Parliament had 
actually passed a Bill authorising the Crown to 
accord a formal recognition to the accomplished fact. 
The conduct of negotiations seemed, therefore, by 
every right, to belong to Fox. But Shelburne did 
not think so ; and, when Fox sent an agent to Paris 
to treat with Vergennes, the French Minister, Shel- 
burne sent another to treat with Franklin. The 
inevitable result followed. Shelburne's agent was no 



260 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

match for the astute American ; and the latter, quite 
naturally, tried to maintain negotiations with Shel- 
burne through his confiding emissary. The King, 
who detested Fox, and whose gravest fault was, that 
he continually subordinated public interests to his 
private .feelings, encouraged Shelburne in his 
duplicity. At the critical moment, Rockingham died 
(July 1st); and Fox at once resigned, taking with 
him Lord John Cavendish, Burk-e, and a number of 
minor followers. The most startling result of the 
secession was the admission to office, as Chancellor 
of the Exchequer, of the youthful Pitt, who, though 
only in his twenty-fourth year, had already refused 
minor office under Rockingham, and who had dis- 
tinguished himself in the session just about to close, 
by a powerful speech in favour of Parliamentary 
Reform, his motion being lost by only twenty votes. 

In the session which followed, there occurred an 
episode which has always been considered as one of 
the most peculiarly disgraceful in English political 
history, and which has left upon the memory of Fox 
an indelible stain. The great orator was smarting 
under a just sense of unworthy treatment. He had 
been ousted from an office, in which he had rendered 
splendid service to his country, by a disgraceful trick; 
but he could not justify his resignation without be- 
traying Cabinet secrets. It is true, that he might have 
alleged as his excuse the conduct of Thurlow, who had 
openly opposed his colleagues' measures in the House 
of Lords.i But Thurlow's ways were too well known 

^ The Chancellor openly stigmatised the Revenue Officers' Bill as 
" an attempt to deceive and betray the people." 



COALITION OF FOX AND NORTH 26 1 

to be treated as an adequate explanation. Fox 
accordingly suffered under the imputation of having 
wrecked a promising Government by his incapacity 
to work with other people. This was an imputation 
which he felt keenly; for he was one of the most sweet- 
tempered of men, and compliance, not pugnacity, 
was his foible. He had really resigned because he 
saw that the old corrupt system was being revived 
through the agency of Shelburne and Thurlow. In 
his disappointment, he took the extreme step of 
entering into a close alliance with North ; and the 
country was scandalised by the sight of two great 
Parliamentary leaders, who for ten years had been 
the champions of opposing parties, now suddenly 
reconciled in an unholy alliance, formed with the 
object of overthrowing a Government in which one of 
them had, until a few months before, held prominent 
office. It is true that Fox and North had once before 
been allies, that Fox had, indeed, as we have seen, 
entered public life under the auspices of North, and 
that, as their intimates knew, they had remained 
friends in private life. But on almost every conceiv- 
able public question they were notoriously at issue. 
Fox had been the champion of American claims ; 
North had opposed those claims to the bitter end. 
Fox had been the great denouncer of that system of 
Court influence of which North had been the supreme 
exponent. Fox was an advocate of Parliamentary 
and Executive Reform ; North was pledged to the 
old abuses. Fox had lent the whole weight of his 
eloquence in favour of freedom of the Press, and 
the publicity of Parliamentary debates ; North had 



262 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

steadily maintained the opposite view. It was too 
much to expect the country to beHeve that North 
had been converted to Fox's views of the necessity 
of aboHshing Court influence, or that Fox had come 
to the impartial conclusion that North's views on the 
the American war were, after all, sound. There are 
some alliances so shocking, that their very existence 
is more harmful than the continuance of the evils 
which they are formed to oppose. 

Nevertheless, if the country was staggered, the 
House of Commons was not unwilling to follow the 
lead of two such experienced leaders as Fox and 
North, against the stolid Dundas and the youthful Pitt. 
The curious attitude of the Commons during these 
two eventful years will be touched upon at the close 
of this chapter ; at present it is sufficient to note that 
when, in February, 1783, the preliminaries of peace 
were submitted to Parliament for approval, the 
House, after a debate which lasted until seven in the 
morning, finally left the Ministers in a minority of 
sixteen. All the eloquence of North, Fox, Sheridan, 
Burke, and Cavendish was brought to bear against 
the proposals of the Government ; but the impartial 
reader will fail to discover any valid ground of 
impeachment of a policy which was inevitable after 
the disastrous failures of the war. It is true that 
the utter despair of 1780 had been relieved by the 
brilliant victory of Rodney, and the still more heroic 
defence of Gibraltar by General Elliott ; but there 
was no essential change in the condition of affairs. 
The preliminaries by no means deserved the censure 
poured upon them by the Opposition. Although the 



A WEAK CABINET 263 

Treaty with the United States dealt liberally with the 
new Republic in the matter of boundaries* it gave no 
countenance to the outrageous demand of Franklin 
for the cession of Canada ; and the best proof of the 
substantial wisdom of Lord Shelburne's Government 
in the negotiations is the fact, that the Coalition 
Cabinet which succeeded it did, in the Definitive 
treaties, make no substantial variation from the terms 
of the Preliminary Articles.^ The whole of the 
speeches of the Opposition are in the dreariest style 
of captious debating logic ; but they achieved their 
object, for, after a few weeks' further struggle, on 
March 31st, the Ministry resigned, and the King, to 
his bitter mortification, was obliged to accept a new 
Cabinet, under the nominal leadership of the Duke of 
Portland, with North and Fox as Secretaries of State. 
It is worth notice that, despite the strength of the 
Coalition in the House of Commons, the new Cabinet 
was singularly weak in great names. It consisted of 
only seven members, and of these Fox and North 
were the only men of real power. Lord John 
Cavendish, of course, returned to his old post of 
Chancellor of the Exchequer ; but his reputation for 
honesty had not been improved by recent events, and 
his talents were not great. Portland was a cipher. 
Keppel, though a great sailor, was not a great admini- 
strator, and, having adhered to Lord Shelburne in his 
quarrel with Fox, can hardly have been reckoned as 
a very safe or enthusiastic supporter of the new 

^ The most important addition was the provision, in the treaties with 
France and Spain, for the settlement of a plan of future commercial 
intercourse. 



264 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

Ministers. Lord Stormont, a nephew of Mansfield, 
was a man of only moderate parts; and Lord Carlisle, 
though he had done better than was expected of 
him in Ireland, was a young nobleman who owed 
his position almost entirely to family influence.^ 
Outside the Cabinet, Burke, restored to the Pay 
Office, gave to the Ministry his vigorous support ; 
but his influence was on the wane. Sheridan was 
a brilliant debater, but carried little weight. Unfor- 
tunately, there was no one to whom Fox and North 
could venture to trust the Great Seal, with a seat 
in the Cabinet. Thurlow they determined to get rid 
of ; and Loughborough (Wedderburn), the obvious 
alternative, was obliged to be content with the office 
of First Commissioner, a fact which rendered him by 
no means friendly towards his new colleagues. Lord 
Mansfield became Speaker of the House of Lords ; 
and no one could doubt that his influence would be 
thrown into the scale against the Cabinet. 

Nevertheless, the new Ministry, for a time, floated 
on the wave of prosperity. Measures were passed 
for regulating commercial intercourse with America. 
The Acts of the previous session relating to Ireland 
and to the Civil List Reform were amended and 
completed. A very useful Exchequer Regulation 
Act was carried by the Ministers against the opposi- 
tion of Pitt, who had a Bill of his own on the same 
subject. Although no complete scheme of compen- 
sation for the American loyalists was accepted. Lord 

' He had fulfilled the ungrateful task of heading a Commission sent 
out by Lord North in 1778, to endeavour to bring about a compromise 
with the revolting colonies. 



INDIAN LEGISLATION 265 

North's motion for allowing half-pay to the loyalist 
troops was agreed to. The real interest of the 
remainder of the session lies, however, in the 
strengthening symptoms of independent reform 
which showed themselves, and which clearly fore- 
shadowed the triumphs of half a century later. 
Alderman Sawbridge renewed his favourite motion 
for a shortening of Parliaments, and secured 56 votes 
in a House of 177. Pitt again brought forward the 
subject of the Parliamentary franchise, and was sup- 
ported by Fox, Dundas, and Sheridan, as well as by 
Beaufoy, who, in a brilliant maiden speech, avowed 
himself an uncompromising advocate of reform. 
Finally, a petition from the Quakers in favour of the 
abolition of the slave trade, which was sympatheti- 
cally spoken to by North, appeared as the first act of 
a long and powerful drama, fraught with immense 
importance to the welfare, not only of England, but 
of humanity. 

Parliament met unusually early for the autumn 
session ; and an event soon occurred which tested the 
strength of the Ministry to the utmost. The subject 
of India had long occupied the attention of successive 
Governments ; and it was agreed on all hands that 
legislation on a great scale was necessary. The 
company of London merchants which had received 
its charter from Elizabeth in the year 1600 had passed 
through a strange and adventurous career. At first a 
mere "regulated" company of merchants, each of 
whom traded on his own account, it had in 161 2 
become a joint-stock enterprise. Political jealousies 
at the close of the seventeenth century, and the 



266 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

curious system of finance which induced Governments 
to bargain for loans as the price of commercial privi- 
leges, at one time threatened it with serious rivalry. 
But, by skilful management, the new " English Com- 
pany " of 1698 was appropriated by its older and 
more experienced competitors ; and, in 1707, the 
"United Company" had secured a monopoly, so far 
as the State could confer it, of the whole trade with 
the East for a period of twenty years. So strict was 
the exclusiveness of the Company, and so powerful 
its interests, that Englishmen were prohibited by 
statute in 1720 from ever visiting India without its 
license. As the price of substantial loans, its charter 
was renewed again and again ; and, as each new loan 
was accompanied by an increase in the stock of the 
Company, its nominal capital finally rose to a sum of 
over three millions, • 

It was not, however, until the victories of Clive 
had rendered the Company a territorial state, that 
the national Government took any direct part in the 
affairs of India. The first interposition occurred in 
1753, when the Crown was authorised to establish by 
charter certain courts of justice in the three chief 
settlements of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay. A 
useful measure in the following year sanctioned the 
establishment of courts-martial for the trial of offences 
committed by soldiers in the employ of the Company, 
and empowered the Crown to provide, by Articles of 
War, for the control of the Company's troops. A 
very wholesome clause of the same statute enabled 
persons aggrieved by the acts of the Presidents and 
Members of Council of the three settlements, to 



EAST INDIA COMPANY REMODELLED 267 

sue in England on the alleged injuries ; and this 
principle was extended in 1769 to the acts of all the 
Company's officials. 

The rapid conquests of the Seven Years' War 
rendered the Company the dominant power in 
India, and poured apparently boundless wealth into 
its coffers. The dividends rose by leaps and bounds; 
writers in the Company's service accumulated 
fortunes so rapidly that i^ 1,000 were openly offered 
for a nomination ; and even military officers, whose 
nominal pay was scanty, became rich on the pro- 
ceeds of irregular transactions. The Government 
determined that the nation should share in the 
Company's profit. In 1766, an Act of Parliament 
stipulated that ^400,000 should be paid into the 
Exchequer in the course of two years ; and in 1768 
Parliament bargained for an annual payment of 
^^400,000 for five years, as the price of allowing the 
Company to retain its territorial revenues, whilst 
it provided that the dividend paid to shareholders 
should not exceed 12 per cent. The Company also 
undertook to export at least ;^300,ooo worth of 
English manufactures every year, and to lend the 
cash in its home coffers to the public at 2 per 
cent. 

In the year 1773 an important step was taken by 
the well-known Regulating Act introduced by Lord 
North. The Government of the Company was 
remodelled by a provision which enacted that the 
twenty-five Directors, instead of being annually 
elected, should hold office for four years, six 
members retiring each year in rotation. The quali- 



268 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

fication for a vote in the Court of Proprietors, which 
elected the Directors and decided important ques- 
tions, was raised to i^i,ooo stock. The supreme 
control of poUtical affairs in India was vested in a 
Governor-General and Council, under whose direct 
administration were placed the provinces of Bengal, 
Orissa, and Behar, with a supervision over the 
Governors of Madras, Bombay, and Bancoolen. But 
all these officials were to be absolutely subject to the 
orders of the Court of Directors in London, in whose 
hands was left the vast patronage of the Company, 
subject, in the case of the Governor-General and his 
Council, to the consent of the Crown, which was also 
authorised to establish a Supreme Court for Bengal 
at Calcutta, with a highly-paid Chief Justice and 
associates. The valuable reforms introduced, at con- 
siderable risk, by Clive during his second period of 
office, were reinforced by the provisions that no 
military or civil servant of the Company should 
accept any presents from natives, or carry on any 
trade on his own account, and that no British 
subject should lend money to natives at a higher 
rate of interest than 12 per cent. By this time the 
hollowness of the Company's financial prosperity had 
become manifest, and, instead of receiving a subsidy 
for the national exchequer. Parliament had to vote a 
loan of i^ 1, 400,000 to help the Company out of its 
embarrassments. 

The plan of 1773 did not work happily. Warren 
Hastings, who had been nominated by the Act 
Governor-General, with a salary of ;^25,ooo a year, 
was opposed by his colleagues in the Council, who 



WARREN HASTINGS 269 

intrigued against him with the Court of Directors ; 
and, as a majority of voters was necessary to support 
his measures, he was greatly hampered in his govern- 
ment. Quarrels arose between the Supreme Court 
and the Council. Sir Elijah Impey, the Chief Justice, 
shocked Indian feeling by sentencing to death, on a 
charge of forgery, Nuncomar, a high-caste Brahmin, 
who had attacked Hastings. The latter, urged on by 
the Court of Directors, who continually demanded 
remittances, adopted a vigorous policy of somewhat 
doubtful morality. He stopped the payment to the 
Moghul Emperor of the tribute promised by Clive, on 
the ground that the Emperor was in the hands of the 
insurgent Mahrattas. He sold Allahabad and Kora 
to the Nabob of Oudh ; and lent British troops for 
the suppression of the Rohillas, that potentate's 
enemies. He crushed the Rajah of Benares, and 
exacted from him heavy tribute ; and he extorted a 
huge fine from the Begum, or Queen-Mother, of Oudh. 
whom he accused of aiding the Rajah (Cheyt Singh). 
Under this vigorous policy the territorial revenues of 
the Company improved, but its commercial transac- 
tions were as unsuccessful as before, and the attempt 
to retrieve its failure was the immediate cause of the 
unhappy incident at Boston in 1773 (p. 233), which 
precipitated the American War. Moreover, as time 
went on, the enemies of Hastings began to make their 
complaints heard in England. Scandalous examples 
of oppression were reported. Sir Thomas Rumbold, 
Governor of Madras, who had started life as a^waiter 
at Arthur's Club, acquired special notoriety by his 
ill-gotten gains. His case was brought before Par- 



270 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

liament, and, though he was ultimately acquitted by 
the Committee, it was generally suspected that he 
owed his escape to a nefarious bargain. The recall of 
Sir Elijah Impey was voted. Finally, the invasion of 
the Carnatic by Hyder Ali brought matters to a 
crisis. A Committee of Secrecy was appointed in 
1781 ; but, somewhat inconsistently. Parliament, whilst 
professing deep abhorrence of the irregularities which 
had taken place, agreed to renew the Company's com- 
mercial monopoly for another period of ten years, in 
return for a payment of ^400,000. The Company, 
however, was utterly unable to raise the amount, 
and even failed to pay the arrears of Customs' duties 
for which it had undertaken responsibility. In the 
early days of the Rockingham Ministry the House 
voted the recall of Warren Hastings and Governor 
Hornby ; but the Court of Proprietors refused to allow 
the Directors to act upon the vote, and it became 
generally known that, in its refusal, it was backed 
by the secret approval of the King. The matter 
thus became a great party question. The Lord 
Advocate Dundas, who, though he was nominally a 
member of the Coalition, was plainly trimming his 
sails to tack for the Court haven, obtained leave to 
bring in a Bill dealing with the affairs of India ; and 
it was necessary, if they would not see the matter 
taken out of their own hands, for the Ministry to put 
forward their own measure. 

Accordingly, on the opening of the Autumn Session 
of 1783, Fox introduced his celebrated scheme. It 
proposed to place the supreme political control of 
Indian affairs in the hands of a body of seven " Com- 



FOX^S INDIA BILL I'Jl 

missloners," ^ nominated by the Bill, to hold office for 
four years, and to be removable onl}^ upon the 
address of one of the Houses of Parliament, but 
vacancies and successions to be filled by the Crown. 
These Commissioners were to have the full disposal 
of the patronage of the Company, to undertake the 
redress of grievances alleged by the native princes, 
and to hear all charges of corruption against the 
Company's officials. The commercial affairs of the 
Company were placed under the contro'l of a Board 
of nine Assistant Commissioners, nominated in the 
first instance by the Bill, but afterwards to be elected 
by the Court of Proprietors. It was expressly pro- 
vided that the Commissioners, even when appointed 
by the Crown, should be eligible for seats in the 
House of Commons. A second measure, which does 
not appear to have been more than formally intro- 
duced, dealt with the local arrangement in India. It 
confirmed the authority of the Governor-General and 
Council, but strictly limited that authority in the 
matter of treaties and acquisitions of territory, and 
made them subordinate in all matters to the control 
of the Commissioners in England. Rents and tribute 
were not to be raised, forfeited lands were to be 
restored, and many of the abuses of the old system 
were to be swept away. 

Reserving criticism of the measure until we come 
to deal with that which was finally accepted in its 
place, we may here concern ourselves only with the 
fate of the Government scheme. The Bill, despite a 

^ This was the proposal of the Bill ; but in the course of debate Fox 
consented to restore the old title of " Directors." 



272 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

good deal of opposition from Pitt, Dundas, Wilkes, 
and Wilberforce, and petitions from the Company 
and the Corporation of London, passed through all 
its stages in the House of Commons by substantial 
majorities, after a series of debates which were inter- 
esting as comprising the maiden efforts of Flood, 
Erskine, and Scott (afterwards Lord Eldon). But 
towards the end of its progress an ominous rumour 
began to spread, to the effect that its further career 
was to be checked by an interposition from the 
highest quarter. The opponents of the measure had 
in fact gained access to the ear of the King, and, 
mainly through the efforts of Thurlow and the 
youthful Earl Temple, who had inherited from his 
uncle, along with his peerage and estates, that love 
of intrigue which had made him one of the most 
detestable characters in English political history, had 
succeeded in creating in the royal mind a violent 
hatred of the Bill. The precise nature of the argu- 
ments employed can only be guessed at ; but it is 
believed that they tended to convince the King, 
always ready to be convinced in such a direction, 
that the measure, if passed, would give a permanent, 
or, at l^ast, a long continuance of power to Fox 
and his followers, who, by means of the enormous 
patronage of India, would entrench themselves behind 
a solid phalanx of indirect support, which would 
render their position impregnable. Inasmuch as the 
King desired, more than anything else, to get rid of 
Fox, he determined to make a desperate effort to 
defeat the latter's plans. In his eagerness he took a 
step, the immorality of which, from a political stand- 



INTERVENTION OF THE KING 2Jl 

point, has hardly been questioned by any competent 
critic. He gave Temple a letter which declared that 
"whoever voted for the India Bill were not only not 
his friends, but he (the King) should consider them 
as his enemies. And if these words were not strongf 
enough Earl Temple might use whatever words he 
might deem stronger or more to the purpose." This 
letter the King authorised Temple to show to the 
peers, of course, privately ; and the result was that, 
on the second reading in the Lords, the Bill was 
defeated by a majority of nineteen votes. On the same 
evening, with scarcely credible indecency, the King 
sent Sir Evan Nepean, Lord North's under-secretary, 
to demand from Fox and North an instant surrender 
of their seals of office. Nepean found his chiefs at 
supper, surrounded by a large company, and, without 
any attempt at secrecy, though he was most kindly 
received, blurted out his message, which was, of 
course, instantly obeyed. ^ 

It is hardly possible to exaggerate the impropriety 
of which the King had been guilty. Not only had 
he directly procured the rejection of a cardinal 
measure introduced by his own constitutional advisers 
— in fact, as Fox afterwards humorously explained, 
the royal letter had produced such an effect that 
some peers, who had given promises to vote for the 
Bill, were convinced of its unsoundness even before 
they had heard the debates. Not only had he treated 

^ There is a still more extraordinary version of this story, to the effect 
that North was roused from sleep at one o'clock in the morning by the 
royal messenger. But the account given in the text is probably 
accurate. 

19 



274 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

a vote in the Lords, contrary to all precedent, as 
instantly decisive of the fate of a Ministry. But he 
had followed up his determination with every circum- 
stance of insult, in such a way as to leave no doubt on 
the mind of the nation that the whole plan had 
proceeded from violent personal feeling. Nor had he 
even the excuse that no alternative lay open to him. 
If, in his judgment, the measure was so disastrous to 
the national interests that its defeat was essential, he 
might have sent for Fox as soon as it was introduced, 
and warned him, that, if it were persisted in, he should 
feel himself compelled, either to dismiss his Ministers, 
or to dissolve Parliament and appeal to the nation. 
Or he might, even at the last moment, have refused 
to assent to the measure. It was less than a hundred 
years since a similar course had been adopted by one 
of the greatest of English Kings ; and there is little 
ground for saying that in 1783 such a step would 
have been illegal, or even unconstitutional. At any 
rate it would have been more manly, more entitled to 
respect, than the course which, at the risk of embark- 
ing the two Houses in a bitter quarrel, first procured 
the contemptuous rejection of a measure which had 
been approved in the Commons by a large majority, 
and then inflicted a studied insult upon Ministers 
who enjoyed the confidence of that House. 

It was not to be supposed that the Commons 
would tamely submit to such proceedings. Two 
days after the dismissal of Fox and North, they 
passed a resolution strongly condemnatory of the 
course of action pursued ; and when, on the 19th of 
December, it was announced that Pitt had undertaken 



PITT'S ADMINISTRATION 2/5 

to form a Ministry, the statement was received with 
derisive cheers, and the opposing forces prepared for 
war. Temple had received the price of his disgrace- 
ful services by being given the post of Secretary of 
State ; and it is even asserted, by contemporary 
writers, that he was first entrusted with the task of 
framing a Cabinet^ It is, however, satisfactory to 
know, that the same disposition which had qualified 
him to fulfil his former unscrupulous mission rendered 
him unfit for more honourable service, and that, after 
three days of office, he thought it better to retire. 
The only members of the new Administration, except 
Pitt, who had any real weight, were Thurlow, who 
regained the Seal, Dundas, whose reputation for 
business capacity and debating power stood high, 
and William Grenville, yet another member of the 
family which, for the last thirty years, had exercised 
such a questionable influence on English politics. 

The situation was a strange one. The Opposition 
included, with few exceptions, every debater of note 
and talent in the House ; and it was, apparently, 
backed by a substantial majority. It determined 
to revenge upon the new Ministers the unconsti- 
tutional action to which they owed their offices. So 
confident were its members in their superiority, that 
they persisted for a time in treating the new Cabinet 
as an elaborate joke. On the other side Pitt, not yet 
in his twenty-fifth year, with only a few months' 

^ The rumour probably arose from the fact that the King employed 
him to write letters of dismissal to the other members of the Coalition 
Government. George III. was a shrewd judge of character, and was 
hardly likely to trust Temple, though he might use him. 



2/6 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

experience of office, stood almost alone. But he was 
backed by the King, who was prepared to go to any 
lengths in his support, and strengthened by a resolute 
ambition, which never for a moment quailed before 
the strength arrayed against him. 

The policy of the Opposition was exceedingly 
simple. It was necessary, if the business of the 
country was to be carried on, that certain measures 
should be passed before the close of the Session. If 
the annual Mutiny Bill did not become law, it would 
be impossible to maintain a single regiment under 
arms without a direct defiance of the Bill of Rights ; 
and the day was long past in which the country 
could contemplate with equanimity the total disap- 
pearance of the regular army. If Supply were not 
voted, the Navy and most of the other public services 
could not be paid. To secure the passing of these 
measures was the main duty of the chief representa- 
tive of the Government in the Commons. If he 
failed in his task it seemed clear that he must resign 
office. The Opposition resolved that Pitt should 
fail. 

The one thing which the Opposition feared, or 
professed to fear, was a dissolution. In Mr. Lecky's 
opinion, this was a disastrous mistake on the part of 
Fox and his colleagues. But it is doubtful whether 
his judgment is correct. Fox had already no small 
experience of elections, and he had friends all over 
the country who could not fail to keep him informed 
of the temper of the constituencies. North was an 
unrivalled expert in such matters. It may be that 
their estimate of the chances is more to be regarded 



DEFEAT OF THE OPPOSITION 2jy 

than Mr. Lecky's. An appeal for a dissolution would 
probably have lost them many votes in the House ; 
for Parliament was only in its fourth session, and 
members who had paid heavily for their seats would 
have resented any attempt to deprive them of three 
years of their tenure. It may even have been that 
the chiefs of the Opposition hoped, by pretending 
fear of a dissolution, to draw Pitt into an error of judg- 
ment which would have brought about his immediate 
fall. But, if this were their object, they were signally 
defeated. When, on December 22nd, Erskine carried 
an Address to the Crown deprecating a dissolution, 
Pitt, through the royal message in reply, calmly 
disclaimed any intention of taking such a step ; and 
though, after the Christmas holidays, the youthful 
Premier puzzled and annoyed the House by main- 
taining a dogged silence on the subject, there was 
nothing in his conduct to hint that he contemplated 
any premature ending of the session. On the 
contrary, he treated votes of censure and resolutions 
for removal as items of no consequence ; and quietly 
proceeded to introduce a rival scheme for dealing 
with Indian affairs. Mystified and angry, the House 
indignantly rejected the measure ; but it was signifi- 
cant that the majority of the Opposition fell to eight 
on the vote. Now thoroughly alarmed, the Opposi- 
tion redoubled their attack. On the 2nd of February, 
in spite of a platonic resolution for reconciliation, 
passed on the motion of Grosvenor, Coke's motion 
condemnatory of the position of the Ministry was 
carried by seventeen votes ; and on the next day it 
was resolved, by a slightly larger majority, to lay the 



2/8 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

resolution before the King. Still Pitt maintained a 
serene composure, and a week later the Opposition took 
the extreme step of refusing to consider the Report on 
the Ordnance Estimates. It seems probable that this 
proceeding did not meet with the approval of the 
independent members of the House ; for, soon after- 
wards, decided attempts at reconciliation were made, 
and when the Opposition renewed their directly 
hostile motions, their majority fell to twelve, and 
finally to one. It was now clear that a single issue 
must decide the struggle, and all eyes turned to 
the debate on the Mutiny Bill, which was fixed 
for March 9th. The Opposition had once before 
succeeded in postponing the measure, and they now 
threatened, if they let the Bill through, to limit its 
operation to a period of two or three months. But 
at the critical moment, to the astonishment of the 
House, Fox announced his intention not to oppose 
the Bill, which thereupon passed in the usual form. 
Sir James Burges, a minor politician of some note 
at the time, attributes Fox's decision to a remarkable 
constitutional discovery made by him (Sir James), to 
the effect that the Mutiny Bill might be introduced 
into the Lords ; but he does not explain how this 
interesting suggestion, which he alleges to have been 
conveyed by him to his friend. Lord Caermarthen, 
from Lord Caermarthen to Pitt, and from Pitt to Fox, 
would have obviated the necessity of a subsequent 
debate in the Commons. ^ In truth, Fox felt that 

^ Sir James was a curious person. It appears to have afiforded him 
unbounded satisfaction to establish his right to carry a baton in the 
presence of the King. [Bland-Burges Papers, 301). 



TRIUMPH OF PITT 2/9 

the ground was slipping from his feet. The country 
had been at first amused at the sight of the unequal 
struggle between the young Minister and his oppo- 
nents. But that amusement was passing into interest, 
into admiration, finally into enthusiasm ; and Fox had 
no wish to court the disaster which he saw to be 
threatening. His forebodings were fully realised. 
On March 25th the long-anticipated dissolution took 
place. The election which followed gave the Ministry 
an enormous majority, the Opposition passed into 
final oblivion, and Pitt immediately entered upon 
that long period of supreme power which lasted, with 
one brief exception, until his death in 1806. 

Although this chapter has already exceeded the 
normal length, it must not close without a brief 
reference to a question which, to the reader who has 
followed the course of events which it has attempted 
to detail, will naturally have caused some difficulty. 
How was it that the same House of Commons which 
had so long supported North, veered round to 
Rockingham, then, after the defection of the Rock- 
ingham Whigs, continued for a short time to support 
Pitt and Dundas, then went over to the Coalition, 
finally, was just on the point of deserting the 
Coalition for Pitt, when the dissolution put an end 
to its labours ? 

A slight reflection will convince us, that this curious 
vacillation is not to be accounted for by the easy 
explanation of royal influence. Doubtless the " King's 
Friends" did their utmost for North, and for Pitt and 
Dundas in the Shelburne Ministry. But they failed 
to prevent the fall of North and the Shelburne 



280 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

Cabinet ; and it is not to be supposed, that they 
supported either the Rockingham Government or 
the Coalition, both of which were detested by the 
King. 

Neither will the Whig connection explain the diffi- 
culty. Doubtless, the borough interest of Rockingham 
and his friends was considerable ; but it had failed for 
twelve years to get rid of North, and it failed, even 
when reinforced by North himself, to prevent a 
decided growth of feeling in the House in favour of 
Pitt. Doubtless, too, the Ministry of the day, even 
when opposed by the King, exerted a good deal of 
patronage ; but, as we have seen, even an alliance of 
Ministerial patronage with royal influence could not 
keep Shelburne in office. 

The inference appears to be irresistible, that, in 
spite of Court bribery and borough management, the 
House of Commons, at the close of the eighteenth 
century, was a good deal more independent than is 
generally assumed to have been the case. Apparently, 
the country gentlemen, who, for the most part, repre- 
sented the counties, had fallen under the spell neither 
of party nor of corruption. They were inclined on 
principle to support the Administration, especially 
when the Administration called itself Whig ; but they 
exercised a good deal of free choice. It is well known, 
that both Chatham and Pitt regarded them as the 
most satisfactory part of the representation ; and this 
view seems to have been justified. Their weak point 
was a preference of field sports to their duties in the 
House ; and this, at a time when the session of Parlia- 
ment usually covered the whole of the hunting 



INFLUENCE OF POPULAR APPROVAL 28 1 

season,! was a grave drawback. Unless threatened 
with an increase in the Land Tax, or interested by a 
new mihtia scheme, they could hardly be persuaded 
to regular attendance. But, on great occasions, their 
presence was often the deciding factor ; and the 
anxiety of rival politicians to secure their approval is 
very manifest in the debates. In the fierce struggle 
between Pitt and the Coalition they played a con- 
spicuous part. . In the early days of that struggle. 
Lord Charles Spencer, and Coke of Norfolk, both of 
them typical country squires, moved hostile resolu- 
tions against the Ministry. As time went on, and that 
natural sympathy with a man fighting against long 
odds, which is one of the best features in the English 
character, began to tell in favour of Pitt, it was the 
country gentlemen, led by Thomas Grosvenor, who 
held a long series of meetings at the St. Alban's 
Tavern, and endeavoured to promote a compromise. 
It was perhaps easier for a member, in the latter half 
of the eighteenth century, to acquire a following in the 
House of Commons on his personal merits alone, 
than it has ever been since. If this be the truth, it 
can only have been because the House then contained 
a considerable section of men who followed the 
bidding neither of the Crown, nor the Ministers, nor 
the constituencies ; but exercised their own indepen- 
dent judgment. 

Apart, however, from all minor considerations, it 
need hardly be pointed out, that the one supreme 

^ It is not a little curious, that Pitt, only a year after his accession to 
power, began the present practice of calling the House together in 
January. 



282 REVIVAL OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 

result of the Titanic struggle between Pitt and the 
Coalition was to establish the great principle, that a 
Minister defeated in the House of Commons has yet 
one possible appeal against extinction. The precise 
limits of this right are still in dispute ; and there are 
politicians who consider that it cannot be claimed, if 
the House which condemns the Minister was elected 
whilst he was in office. Be this as it may, the prin- 
ciple was established in 1784; and it threw an alto- 
gether new light upon Burke's famous assertion, that 
political authority depends not only upon connection, 
but upon popular approval. What Burke himself 
thought of this application of his words, it is not 
difficult to guess ; though it is not easy to see how he 
could reconcile his philosophy with his partisanship. 
But there was a peculiar felicity in the fact, that the 
keystone of the new arch was cemented by Pitt. It 
was an achievement worthy of the favourite son of 
the great statesman who had made popular opinion 
a working force in politics. 




X 



PITT 



The life of the younger Pitt is a great tragedy. 
Placed in supreme power at an age when most men 
are but just becoming conscious of the reahties of life, 
backed by a public approval more universal than had 
before been vouchsafed to any English Minister, save, 
perhaps, his own father, full of sympathy with the 
new movements of thought and feeling which were 
destined to play so great a part in the history of his 
country, he seems, as we look at him in 1784, to be 
destined to take rank as one of the creators of 
national institutions, to lead the nation out of the 
bondage of medieval survivals into the promised land 
of industrial freedom, to be, in short, what Stein was 
to Prussia, Bernstorff to Denmark, and Cavour to 
Italy. But, in the bright dawn of his career, he was 
met and overwhelmed by the storm of the French 
Revolution. Foreseeing the doom of his hopes, he 
struggled long to keep his country out of the whirl- 
pool of European politics. But events were too strong 

283 



284 PITT 

for him. The financial reformer was compelled to 
become the author of a new and searching system of 
taxation, and the creator of a National Debt which 
loomed gigantic beside the puny achievements of his 
predecessors. The friend of religious freedom was 
doomed to imperil his honour by giving way before 
the stern resistance to Catholic Emancipation. The 
champion of Parliamentary Reform had to abandon 
the task so hopefully begun. The popular hero was 
obliged to move the suspension of the Habeas Corpus 
Act, and to bring forward the Seditious Meetings 
Bill. The advocate of peace found himself the centre 
of European Coalitions, and the mainstay of profes- 
sional armies. Had Pitt lived to the normal age of 
statesmen, his fate might have turned. England 
might have been spared the horrors of the reaction, 
and her hero's fame might, after all, have shone out 
with peaceful splendour in his closing years. But it 
was not to be. Cut off in the prime of his days and 
the gloom of his hopes, he did not live to see the 
better England which he had so earnestly longed 
to create. The tangled web of diplomacy, which 
choked and finally stifled his life, is beyond the scope 
of these pages ; here it will be sufficient to touch 
upon the reforms by which he left a permanent mark 
on the national life. 

The first of these is, of course, his India Act. We 
have seen that, even before the dissolution which gave 
him his great power, Pitt had brought forward a 
scheme to replace the famous plan of P'ox, and that 
it had been contemptuously rejected. As soon as 
the new House had settled down to work, after the 




WILLIAM PITT (1759-1806). 
Portrait by John Hoppner, R.A., in the National Portrait Gallery. 



286 PITT 

excitement of the famous Westminster Election, ^ the 
Prime Minister re-introduced his India Bill. It is 
obvious, from a glance at its contents, that it proceeded 
on lines wholly different from those of the Coalition 
measure. Instead of a body of Commissioners, 
appointed for the sole purpose of managing Indian 
affairs, Pitt proposed to create a new department of 
State, consisting of six Privy Councillors nominated 
during pleasure by the Crown, the Home Secretary 
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer being always 
of their number. This Board was to have the right 
of examining all the despatches received by the 
Company from its officials in India, and such of the 
Directors' proceedings and despatches as were con- 
cerned with military or civil government, or with 
territorial revenues. The nomination of the Com- 
manders-in-Chief in the three Presidencies of Calcutta, 
Madras, and Bombay was vested absolutely in the 
Crown ; and the holders of these offices were to rank, 
next after the respective Governors in the Councils 
of the Presidencies. The nomination of the remaining 
officials was left with the Court of Directors ; but the 
approval of the Crown was made necessary in the case 
of Governors and Members of Councils, and any of 
these high officials might be recalled by the Crown at 
any moment. The superiority and authority of the 
Governor-General at Calcutta over the Governors of 



* This was the celebrated occasion on which the beautiful Duchess 
of Devonshire appeared as the champion of Fox, who, however, only 
succeeded in obtaining second place on the declaration of the poll. 
The irregularities of the returning officer resulted in the length of the 
poll being reduced in the future from forty to fifteen days. 



Pitt's india act 287 

the other presidencies was continued ; ^ but the 
Governor-General himseh" was forbidden, except in 
certain cases, to commence hostiHties without the 
approval of the Home Government. To enable 
delicate transactions to be conducted with the neces- 
sary silence, the Directors were required to appoint a 
small Committee of Secrecy to act in conjunction with 
the Board of Control (as the new Government Com- 
mittee was called). The power of the Court of Pro- 
prietors was practically abolished, by the provision 
which rendered it powerless to annul any resolution 
of the Directors which had been approved of by the 
Board of Control. A very stringent clause (repealed in 
1786) compelled each official of the Company, on his 
return to England, to specify on oath the amount of 
property brought back by him ; and precautions were 
taken to prevent an extravagant increase of the 
Company's establishment. The provisions for the 
trial of accusations against officials were extended 
and improved ; but the interests of the servants of 
the Company were protected by the enactment of the 
rule that promotion, civil and military, should go by 
seniority, except for special cause. 

Pitt conducted the debates on the measure in the 
Commons with great skill and moderation ; and, in 
spite of the formidable criticism of the Opposition, 
now reinforced by Francis, Hastings' great opponent 



^ The dangers of a difference of opinion between the Governor- 
General and the members of his Council were somewhat reduced by 
the clause enabling the Crown to remove either ; but they did not 
finally disappear till 1793, when the Governors were empowered to 
override the votes of their colleagues in urgent cases. 



288 PITT 

in the Bengal Council, the measure was carried 
through both Houses by large majorities. 

It is hardly possible to doubt the superiority of 
Pitt's measure to that of Fox. Not only was it far 
simpler, but it had the great advantage of effecting 
very substantial change with the least amount of 
friction. No doubt the charges of meditated corrup- 
tion against Fox and his colleagues were wilfully 
exaggerated to influence opposition ; but it cannot be 
denied that the creation of a Commission holding 
office for a fixed period, and exercising the vast 
patronage of the Company, would have been a 
serious danger to the working of government. A 
change of Ministry during this quadrennial period 
might have led to the existence of hostile relations 
between the Government and the Directors, attended 
with disastrous consequences. The power given by 
Fox's Bill to the Directors created by it, to interfere 
with the management of the Company's commerce, 
was alien from the spirit of English politics ; and 
introduced an unwelcome element. By abandoning 
all attempt to meddle with commercial operations, 
and by restricting interference with patronage to 
the essential minimum, Pitt's measure removed most 
of the ill-feeling and suspicion which had grown up 
about the previous Bill. Above all, by making the 
new controlling body virtually a department of the 
Ministry of the day, Pitt rightly interpreted the trend 
of politics, and avoided what might otherwise have 
proved a serious danger in the working of the 
Cabinet System. It is, doubtless, in rare cases neces- 
sary to create official bodies independent of the 



IMPEACHMENT OF HASTINGS 289 

control of the Ministry of the day.^ But such 
institutions are not in accordance with the general 
principles of our scheme of government ; for it must 
be remembered, that exemption from the control of 
Ministers almost necessarily means exemption from 
the criticism and control of the House of Commons. 
The best evidence of the soundness of Pitt's scheme 
— for which, doubtless, his colleague, Dundas, is 
entitled to much of the credit — is, that it was con- 
tinued on the partial renewal of the Company's 
commercial monopoly in 18 14, and that it became 
the dominant factor in Indian affairs until 1858. 

With the part played by Pitt in the picturesque 
incident of the impeachment of Warren Hastings, it 
is unnecessary to deal at length ; for it forms no part 
of the permanent history of politics. Baulked of their 
scheme for Indian government, the Opposition con- 
centrated the whole of their brilliant energy upon the 
prosecution of the great pro-consul. The parts taken 
by Burke, Fox, Sheridan, and others, are well known 
through the brilliant pages of Macaulay. For the 
appointment of Warren Hastings Pitt had, of course, 
no sort of responsibility. When Hastings was first 
directly attacked in Parliament by Burke, after his 
return from India in 1785, Pitt voted against the 
motion, although it was founded on what was, 
undoubtedly, the weakest point in Hastings' career — 
the Rohilla war. But, on the second charge, founded 
on the fine inflicted by Hastings upon Cheyt Singh, 
the Rajah of Benares, Pitt, to the intense astonishment 

^ Examples at present existing are the Accountant-General's office, 
and the Charity and Ecclesiastical Commissions. 

20 



290 PITT 

of the House, after opposing many of Fox's arguments, 
declared that he should vote for the motion. An 
impeachment followed in due course ; and, as every- 
one knows, after a trial, perhaps the most famous in 
history for the eloquence displayed, the issues involved, 
and the elaborateness and length of the proceedings, 
Hastings was acquitted by the House of Lords in 
1795. Pitt has been greatly blamed for his action ; 
and the most extreme suggestions have been made to 
explain his motives. But the case does not appear 
to be very difficult. Hastings' career included many 
crimes of the first magnitude ; but, in the opinion of 
the less scrupulous type of patriot, his ultimate 
success excused, or even justified, his lapses. It is a 
difficult question, about which men will continue to 
quarrel until the end of time. At first Pitt was 
inclined to take the popular view. But, as his know- 
ledge of the circumstances increased, the pressure of 
his conscience became stronger. Personal purity in 
morals was almost a passion with him ; his external 
haughtiness and genuine pride had in them no taint 
of cruelty. He may even have thought, that no 
apparent indifference to charges such as those brought 
against Hastings would have hampered the work 
of reform on which he was set. But, at any rate, he 
ran great risk by the course which he took, and his 
conduct was that of a strong man. 

It is with unalloyed satisfaction that the historian 
of Pitt passes from his doubtful attitude on the im- 
peachment of Warren Hastings, to the more prosaic 
but more important matter of financial reform. We 
have seen that this subject, thanks chiefly to the 



FINANCIAL REFORM 29 1 

heroic efforts of Burke, had been '' in the air " for the 
previous four years. Pitt cannot, therefore, claim the 
distinguished merit of initiating the beneficent pohcy 
which he did so much to carry out ; nor can he be 
absolved from an immense debt of gratitude, in respect 
of the details of his measures, to that Commission of 
Public Accounts to which reference has before been 
made, and which rendered priceless services to the 
country by its unrivalled series of reports in the years 
immediately following 1780. But, in a system such 
as ours, the steering of measures through Parliament 
is at least half the battle of reform ; and the merit of 
that task belongs undoubtedly to Pitt. Four great 
achievements mark the first years of his power. In 
the absurd arrangements which had grown up since 
the Revolution, the British revenue system was 
necessarily marred by a bewildering confusion and 
waste. The produce of each tax was collected by 
a different set of officials, and paid into a separate 
account at the Exchequer. This produce, after 
deduction of the expenses of collection, was devoted 
by Parliament to a specific object. Worst of all, 
salaries and pensions, wholly unconnected with the 
subject of the tax, were often charged upon it on its 
way to the Exchequer. The result was confusion, 
extravagance and inefficiency. No proper check 
could be kept on collection and expenditure with 
such a want of method. On one item of revenue 
there might be a balance far more than equal to the 
demands for which it was assigned, while on another 
there was a deficit which crippled an important public 
service ; and yet the surplus on one item could not 



2g2 PITT 

go to relieve the deficit on the other. This evil had 
become especially marked since the practice of voting 
Supplies item by item had grown up in the House of 
Commons, as it did during the eighteenth century. 
The Treasury officials, quite naturally, declined to 
sanction any deviation from a scheme so jealously 
watched by the House of Commons as the Budget.^ 
An absurd and antiquated system of audit rendered 
matters worse. Pitt swept the whole of the revenue 
of the country into a Consolidated Fund, and made 
all payments, with a few exceptions, from that source. 
Certain items, such as the Civil List and other fixed 
annual outgoings, were charged permanently on the 
Consolidated Fund, and were known as "Consolidated 
Fund Charges " ; the items of varying amount, voted 
from year to year by the House of Commons (includ- 
ing the growing charges for naval and military 
expenditure), required express Parliamentary sanction 
each year, and became known as " Annual Supply 
Charges." In the year 1 785, the antiquated " Auditors 
of Imprest," who drew huge incomes from fees, and 
did no work, were replaced by a Commission for 
Auditing the Public Accounts, whose duties were still 
further extended by Pitt in 1799 and 1805.2 The 
character of this Commission was altered by the 
creation of the office of Comptroller and Auditor- 

^ This famous word first assumed its modern meaning about the 
middle of the eighteenth century. It is said to have owed its origin to 
a pamphlet entitled, The Budget Opened, which attacked Walpole's 
excise scheme in 1733. 

^ With that tenderness of vested interests which is so marked a 
feature of British politics, the retiring Auditors of Imprest each 
received a life pension of >^7,ooo a year. 



THE SINKING FUND 293 

General in 1866 ; but the system of audit introduced 
by Pitt has not been substantially changed. A 
gigantic reform of the Customs duties, carried out by 
Pitt in the year 1787, not only reduced to order and 
simplicity an important branch of the revenue, which 
had been an almost incredible mass of confusion and 
waste ; it had the two indirect advantages of greatly 
diminishing the amount of smuggling,^ and paving 
the way for future remissions of import duties. The 
magnitude of the scheme may be gathered from the 
fact that, in order to effect it, it was necessary to 
introduce into the House of Commons a series of 
nearly three thousand resolutions. An incidental 
reform, of smaller scope but considerable value, was 
the restriction of the much abused privilege of franking 
letters, exercised by members of Parliament, which 
caused a loss to the Post Office revenue of several 
thousand pounds a year. It must, however, be 
admitted, that the deficit caused by the reduction of 
the Customs duties was somewhat dearly bought by 
the imposition of the Window Tax, which, until its 
abolition in 185 1, tended to produce untold mischief 
to the health of the country, by diminishing the supply 
of light and air to houses. 

Two other famous financial measures connected 
with the name of Pitt must be noticed. One of 
these, the famous " Sinking Fund," has been the 
occasion of much scorn. The idea, of course, was not 

^ Of course Pitt also made direct efforts to stop smuggling. His 
"Hovering Acts" are well known. But it may well be doubted 
whether the reform of the tariff was not the more efficacious 
measure. 



294 p/rr 

new. Ever since the creation of a National Debt, in 
the closing years of the seventeenth century (p. 140), 
the dislike with which it was regarded had induced 
efforts for its abolition. Even before the famous 
measure of Walpole, in 17 16, various isolated pro- 
visions for reduction had been put forward. By 
Walpole's measure, the produce of various duties had 
been set aside to accumulate as a fund for the purpose ; 
but the exigencies of various hard-pressed Ministers 
had wasted it away to a shadow, before the accession 
of Pitt to office. The new Minister, in 1786, intro- 
duced a measure which contemplated the accumulation 
of a million a year from the Consolidated Fund,i and 
the produce of unclaimed Government Annuities, to 
form a fund for the redemption of the State's liabilities. 
In the year 1792, a further income was provided 
by the devotion of i per cent, on every public 
loan to the same purpose. In the following year, a 
further sum of ^^200,000 was charged on the Con- 
solidated Fund ; and a like annual amount was 
awarded every year, until Pitt's resignation in 1801. 
It is generally asserted, that Pitt borrowed his ideas 
on the Sinking Fund from Dr. Price, an eminent 
Nonconformist minister, who had apparently been 
overcome by contemplation of the magic of com- 
pound interest. His fallacies were exposed with 
great accuracy by Dr. Hamilton in 181 3 ; but Pitt 
never acknowledged any indebtedness to Price, and 
it may be well that he was not deceived by the 
calculations of the worthy divine. No doubt he 

^ Actually in the original measure, from the Sinking Fund. But in 
the revision of 1787 the change indicated in the text was made. 



HOSTILE TARIFFS 295 

thought it well worth while to tempt the public to 
make sacrifices for the sake of reducing a liability 
which, if not carefully watched, would certainly favour 
extravagance and, ultimately, lead to heavy taxation. 
So long as the Sinking Fund was honestly fed by the 
surplus of revenue from taxation, the utmost that 
could be said against it was, that the public was 
deluded into being virtuous against its will. But 
when it came, as it soon did, to raising loans at a 
high rate of interest, in order to discharge liabilities 
already incurred at a lower rate, the financial loss on 
the proceeding ought to have been manifest. And 
there is something absurd in the sight of a nation, 
unavoidably called upon to make heroic sacrifices to 
provide for a costly war, and, at the same time, 
saddled with further liabilities, to provide a higher 
rate of interest for the investors in Government stock. 

The last of Pitt's financial measures which we can 
notice is, his determined attempt to break down the 
system of hostile tariffs which had grown up during 
the wars of the eighteenth century. 

In their origin quite as much political as com- 
mercial, these tariffs had, as their worst results, the 
creation of artificial industries unsuited to the circum- 
stances of the different countries, and a perpetuation 
of the barbarous notion, that what one party to inter- 
national commerce gains, the other must necessarily 
lose. It is, of course, on this fallacy that the elaborate 
superstition of the Balance of Trade rests. Unhappily, 
the long prevalence of an unsound system does 
unquestionably create interests, which the adoption 
of truer principles is bound to injure. Pitt, therefore. 



296 PITT 

when he set himself to encourage foreign commerce, 
and to mitigate the severities of the Navigation Acts, 
was prepared to encounter strong opposition. His 
proposal to free Ireland from commercial restrictions 
was defeated by the bitter jealousy of the English 
manufacturers. His various measures for promoting 
commercial intercourse with America were cut down to 
the lowest possible limits. But his efforts to nego- 
tiate a commercial treaty with France were ultimately 
successful ; and, in 1786, a great convention, providing 
for the reduction of port duties on a reciprocal basis, 
was signed by the representatives of the two coun- 
tries, and was followed by similar treaties between 
several of the Continental Powers. Finally, it may 
be worth notice that Pitt, in 1787, in spite of the 
threatening state of the Dutch question, actually 
brought about mutual declarations by England and 
France against the increase of naval and military 
armaments. 

The Minister's efforts for financial reform were 
interrupted in 1788 by a constitutional problem of 
the first importance. In that year the King became 
absolutely incapable of conducting business ; and it 
was necessary to establish a Regency. The circum- 
stances were now essentially different from those of 
1765 (p. 209), owing to the fact that the heir to the 
throne was of full age. But the Prince's character 
was not such as to inspire confidence ; and Pitt 
determined not to allow the whole power of the 
Crown to pass into his hands. In this determination 
he was amply justified ; for the best medical opinion 
pronounced it almost certain that the King would 



THE REGENCY QUESTION 297 

ultimately recover. And, as George was on bad terms 
with his son, nothing could have been more unjust 
than that he should be left practically at his son's 
mercy. The Minister accordingly introduced into 
Parliament a measure for placing the authority of 
the Regent on a limited basis, by depriving him of 
the power of creating peers, and of conferring offices 
or pensions otherwise than during pleasure, and by 
vesting the charge of the King's person, and the 
control of the royal household, in the hands of the 
Queen. I The Prince was furious ; and Fox, who, 
with his friends, was in close alliance with the heir to 
the throne, asserted the doctrine, that the right of 
the Prince of Wales to succeed to the Regency, 
unfettered by any limitation, was indefeasible and 
absolute. This assertion received no countenance 
from the facts of English history ; and, in any case, 
it was very curious doctrine from the mouth of a Whig 
champion. But the Opposition made a powerful use 
of it, to argue that Pitt's action was due to the certain 
conviction, that the first act of the Regent would be 
to dismiss him from office ; and Pitt was placed in 
an invidious position. The difficulties of the situation 
were rendered yet more acute by an Address from 
the Irish Parliament, inviting the Prince to take upon 
himself the Regency as of right. Nevertheless, Pitt 
courageously maintained his proposals, and was sup- 
ported by a strong majority in Parliament. The 

' The extent of the royal patronage, even after the reform of the last 
few years, may be guessed by the fact, that the appointments in the 
royal household were admitted, even in 1788, to be worth ^200,000 a 
year. 



298 PITT 

final difficulty was to procure some sort of a royal 
assent to the Regency Bill ; and the plan adopted by 
the Government was certainly open to criticism.^ 
But, after all, this difficulty was really technical. If, 
as Pitt maintained, Parliament was the proper body 
to provide for a temporary vacancy of the royal office, 
the consent of the Crown was immaterial. Just as 
the measure was about to pass, the King suddenly 
recovered, and Pitt, who was preparing to return to 
practice at the Bar, found himself once more in secure 
possession of office.^ 

We now come to that event which will always be 
regarded as the crowning constitutional achievement 
of Pitt's long period of office, and the matter by 
which his reputation as a statesman must ultimately 
stand or fall. This is, of course, the Legislative 
Union between Great Britain and Ireland. 

Allusion has been made in the preceding chapter 
to the period of prosperity which, despite some diffi- 
culties and drawbacks, followed the great changes of 
1782. A liberal series of Bounty Acts had greatly 
stimulated corn-growing in Ireland, and produced an 
apparently genuine increase of agricultural prosperity. 
An equally careful system of commercial bounties 

^ The Chancellor was empowered, by a jomt resolution of the two 
Houses, to affix the Great Seal to a Commission, issued in the King's 
name, authorising certain Commissioners to summon Parliament, and 
give the Royal Assent to the Bill. 

^ One of the amusing incidents of this anxious period was the 
exquisitely foolish position in which the Irish delegates found them- 
selves when they came to London to present the Regency Address to 
the Prince. They were just preparing, with great ceremony, to wait 
upon his Royal Highness, when the King's recovery was announced. 



IRELAND AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION 299 

had greatly fostered manufactures, despite the break- 
down of Pitt's attempted fiscal reforms in 1785. But 
the fall of the Bastille in 1789, and the definite out- 
break of the French Revolution, which soon followed, 
produced a startling effect upon a population always 
extremely susceptible to the influence of ideas, and 
naturally disposed, for many reasons, to sympathise 
with the French. The writings of Paine, the Angli- 
cised form of those brilliant sophistries of Rousseau 
which had played such a large part in preparing the 
Revolution in France, were scattered broadcast 
throughout Ireland, and exercised an enormous 
influence. Burke's eloquent denunciations of the 
Revolution produced no effect in their author's native 
country ; and the Rights of Man, despite the im- 
mense inferiority of its arguments, swept its rival 
from the field. The important fact to remember is, 
that French sympathies were at first much stronger 
among the active and powerful Presbyterians of the 
north, already half republican by instinct, than among 
the Catholic peasantry of the south and west, whose 
natural leaders abhorred a movement which was 
markedly hostile to their creed, and which placed 
the abolition of authority in matters of religion in 
the forefront of its programme. 

But, if the Catholics were at first indifferent to 
the ideas of the French Revolution, it was quite 
clear to the advocates of French principles, that the 
case of the Catholics was by far the strongest plank 
in their platform. Though the Catholics had been 
freed from most of their social disabilities in 1778- 1782, 
no evil results had followed ; and the exclusion from 



300 PITT 

all share in the government of the country of three- 
fourths of its population became all the more ano- 
malous. Accordingly Wolfe Tone, the author of a 
pamphlet signed " A Northern Whig," which had a 
great circulation in Ulster in 1791, made the emanci- 
pation of the Catholics from political disabilities his 
rallying cry. Though his extreme measures were 
opposed by Grattan and the respectable members 
of the " Whig Club," Grattan's sentiments in favour 
of emancipation were so well known, that his oppo- 
sition had not much effect. So strong seemed the 
case, that the English Government, on the advice of 
Dundas, were prepared to give way ; and they com- 
municated to the Lord-Lieutenant their view that a 
measure of relief should be introduced. 

But the decision of the Cabinet was stoutly opposed 
by the officials in Dublin. The changes of 1 782, though 
they had added greatly to the power of the Irish 
Parliament, had not been favourable to the growth of 
Liberal ideas in that body. Owing to the necessity 
of keeping the Executive in Ireland in harmony with 
the changes of Ministry in England, it was con- 
sidered impossible to permit the adoption of a 
Ministerial system in Dublin. The constitution of 
1782 was, really, therefore, that of a Crown colony, 
in which the Executive is independent of the changes 
of feeling in the country, with the important differ- 
ence that the Lower House in the Irish Parliament was, 
in theory, a purely elective body.^ It was essential, 
therefore, if this difficult system was to work, that 

' In an ordinary Crown colony the Governor is usually empowered 
to appoint a substantial number of members of the Legislative Council. 




RIGHT HON. HENRY GRATTAN, M.P. (1746-1820). 
From an engraving by Godby. 



302 PITT 

the Executive should maintain, by some means, a 
majority in the representative House. The only 
means which, to the authorities of the Castle, seemed 
adequate to the purpose, was a strengthening of the 
corrupt Protestant ascendency, which was prepared, 
at all hazards, to carry through the measures of the 
Government. In consequence, the peculiar position 
of 1792 was, that the Protestant English Cabinet was 
disposed to grant a reform demanded by the Pro- 
testant Wolfe Tone and his newly-founded society of 
United Irishmen ; while the Protestant officials in 
Dublin were bitterly opposed to a measure which 
threatened to shake the Protestant ascendency in 
the Irish Parliament, and the mass of the Catholics 
were, at present, somewhat indifferent to the measure 
proposed for their benefit. 

The year 1792 was mainly spent in discussion 
between the English Cabinet and the Irish officials. 
In the early part of the year, Hobart, the Chief 
Secretary, and Sir John Parnell, the Irish Chancellor 
of the Exchequer, had an interview with Pitt and 
Dundas, and succeeded, for the time, in enforcing 
their views, though Dundas insisted that nothing 
should be done to pledge the English Government 
permanently against Catholic Emancipation. A very 
moderate Bill, introduced by a private member. Sir 
Hercules Langrishe, into the Irish Parliament, gave a 
slight measure of relief, by admitting Catholics to the 
legal profession, abolishing the legal restrictions 
against intermarriage of Catholics and Protestants, 
and doing away with educational disabilities. The 
Government allowed it to pass ; but they took the 



IRISH CATHOLICS ENFRANCHISED 303 

opportunity of making an injudicious appeal to 
sectarian spirit, and their action aroused ill-feeling 
rather than gratitude. In the autumn the English 
Cabinet, now dreading an outbreak of war with 
France, resolved on a thoroughly injudicious com- 
promise. They instructed the Lord-Lieutenant 
(Westmorland) to introduce a measure conferring 
the franchise on Catholics • but refused to admit them 
to seats in Parliament. 

This measure came before the Irish Parliament in 
the year 1793 ; and its weakness was at once mani- 
fest. The Irish officials made no secret of their 
dislike to the duty which they were compelled to 
perform, and Grattan pointed out with great force 
the extreme folly of a measure which, while admitting 
thousands of ignorant Catholics to the franchise, gave 
them no opportunity of electing their legitimate 
leaders, the Irish Catholic gentry. But this criticism 
was little appreciated in England, where it was not 
realised that, owing to the practice of granting leases, 
even of the smallest agricultural holdings, for lives 
instead of for years, the Government measure practi- 
cally amounted to an enfranchisement of the whole 
Catholic peasantry, whilst it left the prosperous 
artisans and shopkeepers of the towns outside the 
political arena.i So manifest was the danger, that 
Sir Lawrence Parsons, though a strong partisan of 
Catholic Emancipation, urged, in a powerful speech, 

' The freehold franchise in England had been fixed by an Act of 
Henry VI. at forty shillings value ; and the limitation had been 
imported into Ireland without much regard to its suitability. A life 
estate is, technically, a " freehold." 



304 t'iTT 

that the proper plan was to restrict the franchise 
to freeholders of ^20 a year, and to admit Catholics 
to Parliament. The Government, however, obsti- 
nately resisted his proposal, as well as the suggestion 
of Ponsonby to grant complete emancipation ; and 
the measure was carried in its original form. But 
any conciliatory effect which the concession might 
have had was largely discounted by an extraordinary 
speech delivered in the House of Lords by Fitzgibbon, 
the Chancellor, one of the ablest and bitterest repre- 
sentatives of the Protestant ascendency. Though he 
announced his intention of voting for the measure, 
Fitzgibbon poured out the whole wealth of his 
mordant satire on the Catholics, traced to the influ- 
ence of the Pope every evil and every difficulty in the 
history of Ireland, and emphatically denied that any 
Catholic could ever be admitted to the smallest 
exercise of authority in the country. 

Thus the famous measure of 1793, instead of being 
a herald of peace, became the signal of religious strife 
in Ireland. Almost immediately afterwards, the 
Catholic society of the " Defenders," which had 
originated in the county of Armagh as a hostile 
organisation against a Protestant society known as 
the " Peep of Day Boys," was revived ; and its influ- 
ence began to spread into other parts of Ireland. 
The United Irishmen, although, as we have seen, 
their founders were Protestants, excited by the out- 
break of the French war, began to make overtures to 
the Defenders ; and, although the religious differ- 
ence of their members for some time kept the 
societies apart, they ultimately succeeded in effecting 



WAJ^ WITH FRANCE 3O5 

a union, with the result that the United Irishmen 
became largely a Catholic body, while the Catholics 
adopted the republican views of Wolfe Tone and his 
followers. On the other hand, the Peep of Day 
Boys rapidly expanded into the formidable move- 
ment of Orangeism, which, by championing the prin- 
ciples of Protestant ascendency in their crudest form, 
soon came into fierce conflict with its Catholic neigh- 
bours. Meantime, however, an event had happened 
which, for nearly a year, held Ireland in a state of 
suspense. 

It is now generally admitted that Cobden's view of 
the origin of the great French war was unfounded in 
fact. In spite of the greatest provocation, Pitt firmly 
maintained a conciliatory attitude during the first 
few years of the French Revolution. Despite Burke's 
thunders, despite the growing uneasiness of the 
wealthy classes at the spread of French principles, 
despite the active programme of the French envoy to 
England, he refused to be drawn into war. On the 
introduction of his Budget in 1792, he declared — and 
there is no reason to doubt his honesty — that he looked 
forward to many years of peace. He knew that a 
war expenditure would ruin his cherished plans of 
financial reform. But, in spite of all his efforts, he 
was drawn into the whirlpool ; and, in the spring of 
1793, the country embarked on that long and terrible 
period of hostilities which ended only at Waterloo. 
Naturally anxious to strengthen himself in the mortal 
struggle by enlarging the basis of his Government, he 
effected, in June, 1794, a junction with the more 
moderate Whigs under Portland, who succeeded 

21 



3o6 PITT 

Dundas as Home Secretary, the latter taking up 
the newly created Secretaryship for War. It was 
part of the bargain with the new members of the 
Cabinet that Fitzwilliam, their highly-respected but 
somewhat indiscreet supporter, should replace West- 
morland as Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ; and Fitz- 
william was known to be favourable to Catholic 
claims. There is much dispute as to the precise 
terms of the bargain ; but it is clear that Fitz- 
william believed himself to be entitled to carry 
out a policy which he believed to be secretly 
favoured by Pitt, and to reverse the attitude of 
Westmorland, with whom Pitt was thought to be on 
bad terms. 

The first act of the new Viceroy, on landing in 
Ireland at the beginning of the year 1795, was to 
dismiss from their offices Hamilton, Cooke, and 
Beresford, three of the permanent officials most 
prominently identified with the system of Protestant 
ascendency. The reason he alleged in his despatches 
was, that he found it utterly impossible to carry out 
his policy through the agency of men who were 
determined to oppose it at every step, and whose 
overwhelming influence in the ranks of corruption 
made it necessary to deprive them of power. Of 
course he was guilty of no illegality in this step. 
The Executive appointments in Ireland, as in Eng- 
land, were held at the pleasure of the Crown ; and 
the Crown in Ireland was represented by the Lord- 
Lieutenant. But it was a rash act, and it spelt 
the Viceroy's doom. Hastening to England, the 
ejected officials began to besiege the doors of the 



THE EMANCIPATION BILL 307 

Ministers with complaints and warnings ; and, in 
the end, their efforts were successful. 

Meanwhile, Fitzwilliam, acting in concert with the 
leaders of the Irish Whigs — Grattan, the Ponsonbys, 
Yelverton — was devising a thorough scheme for the 
removal of Irish discontent. He saw that the great 
want of the country in administration was a good 
system of civil police, which should render it 
unnecessary to employ the soldiery to repress every 
trifling outbreak of disorder. But, if the flames of 
religious war were not to be ignited, it was essential 
that the police in the Catholic districts should be 
themselves Catholics of respectability. This convic- 
tion strengthened him in his disposition to conciliate 
Catholic feeling, by yielding to the growing move- 
ment in favour of emancipation. Now that the 
recalcitrant officials were removed, there would be no 
difficulty in passing the measure through Parliament. 
Even Fitzgibbon admitted as much. Fitzwilliam 
sent home to the Cabinet the fullest accounts of his 
intentions, together with an elaborate statement of 
the reasons on which they were based. For some 
weeks the English Government took no notice of 
his letters. With the full concurrence of the Lord- 
Lieutenant, Grattan obtained leave to bring in an 
Emancipation Bill. Then the mine was sprung. 
The same fatal influence, which had so often inter- 
fered in the decision of delicate questions, once more 
appeared. The evicted officials had gained the ear 
of the King. On February 6th, the monarch formally 
declared his disapproval of Fitzwilliam's policy. On 
the 1 8th, Portland directed Fitzwilliam to oppose 



308 PITT 

Grattan's measure. On the 23rd, the Viceroy was 
recalled. 

The retirement of Fitzwilliam is generally regarded 
as a turning-point in Irish history. It was received 
at first with feelings of dismay by the masses of the 
people, as well as by the more moderate reformers. 
To them it appeared that the English Government, 
after exciting the strongest hopes amongst the 
Catholics, had deliberately handed them over to the 
vengeance of their religious opponents, with every 
circumstance of insult and provocation. The long- 
attempted alliance between the United Irishmen and 
the Defenders was speedily accomplished ; and thus 
a great Catholic organisation, pledged to objects far 
beyond Catholic Emancipation, definitely came into 
existence. On September 21st, the Battle of the 
Diamond, in county Armagh, between the Defenders 
and the Protestants, brought into being the exclu- 
sively Protestant association of the Orangemen ; and 
all the materials of a civil war were therefore at hand. 
Wolfe Tone had been compelled, owing to his com- 
plicity in a French plot, to fly to America at the 
beginning of the year ; there, in Philadelphia he 
found himself surrounded by men who, like himself, 
were exiles from their native land. Hamilton Rowan, 
Napper Tandy, and Reynolds were amongst his 
friends ; and between them it was resolved to send 
a mission to Paris, to invite the active interference of 
France in the affairs of Ireland. Wolfe Tone crossed 
the sea in the spring of 1796; and, though the 
Directory were extremely ignorant of Irish affairs, 
they were much impressed by Tone's earnestness, as 



IRISH DISAFFECTION 3O9 

well as by the representations of Lord Edward Fitz- 
gerald and Arthur O'Connor, who had opened 
independent negotiations with the French agents at 
Hamburg. The direct result of these n^issions was 
the French expedition under Hoche, which reached 
Bantry Bay in the winter of 1796-7, and which, 
though it failed to effect a landing, had a profound 
effect in stirring popular feeling in the south-west. 

All through the year 1797 the discontent became 
profounder. The United Irishmen assumed a more 
extreme and revolutionary character, openly demand- 
ing the abolition of rent and tithes, and declaring 
their intention of separating from England. In the 
north, the rivalry between Orangeism and Catholicism 
became still more marked, and the rival colours of 
yellow and green a yet more frequent signal of dis- 
turbance. The counties of the south-east became 
deeply disaffected. At home, the English Govern- 
ment, disheartened by the failure of Lord Malmes- 
bury's negotiations at Paris, and paralysed by the 
mutinies in the fleet at Spithead and the Nore, were 
at their wits' end. Even Duncan's glorious victory 
at Camperdown did not destroy the possibility of an 
invasion of Ireland ; for the conspirators still had 
high hopes of France, and it is probable, that if 
Napoleon had seriously directed his mind to an 
attack on the Irish coast, the consequences to Eng- 
land would have been disastrous. Camden, who had 
succeeded Fitzwilliam as Lord-Lieutenant, was in 
despair ; and based his chief hopes on buying off the 
Catholic clergy, through the instrumentality of the 
Pope. 



310 PITT 

At last, in the autumn of 1797, the English 
Government took a decided step, by appointing 
Abercromby Commander-in-chief in Ireland. Aber- 
cromby was a thoroughly loyal and able soldier ; but 
he had the misfortune also to be an honest man. As 
soon as he had taken in the situation, he realised 
that one of the chief obstacles in the way of internal 
peace was the violent conduct of the soldiery, who, 
with the countenance of the Castle officials, had 
almost superseded the civil magistrates in certain 
districts. In February, 1798, Abercromby issued his 
famous Orders, directing that, in suppressing dis- 
turbances, the military officers should act strictly in 
subordination to the directions of the civil magis- 
trates ; and that, above all, no measures of reprisal 
should be taken against districts in which undis- 
covered crimes had been perpetrated. The Protestant 
clique were furious ; and entered into direct com- 
munication with the English Government to procure 
Abercromby's recall. In their treacherous efforts, 
they were ably seconded by Eden, now become Lord 
Auckland, who, from his former experience as Irish 
Chief Secretary, spoke with a knowledge which 
rendered him a valuable ally in England. The 
scheme soon worked. In an open letter to the 
Lord-Lieutenant, Portland commented severely on 
Abercromby's conduct ; and that officer, notwith- 
standing the earnest remonstrances of Camden, 
immediately resigned. He was replaced by General 
Lake, the extreme advocate of military severity and 
Protestant ascendency ; and thus, for the second time 
in three years, Ireland learnt that the wishes of the 



REBELLION IN IRELAND 3II 

whole country were as nought in the eyes of the 
EngHsh Government, compared with the interests of 
the Protestant cHque in DubHn. 

The immediate result was the outbreak of the 
Rebellion in Wexford, and the occurrence of 
dangerous, though not so persistent, disturbances 
in Kildare and Meath, in Antrim and Down. 
Happily, the distrust aroused among the republicans 
of the north by the violent proceedings of the French 
Government, did much to abate treasonable feelings 
in Ulster ; and in the northern province, as well as in 
the neighbourhood of Dublin, the disturbances were 
soon put down. But in Wexford a state of war raged 
during the whole summer of 1798. The chief towns 
of the county were alternately in the hands of the 
rebels and the Government troops. More than one 
detachment of the latter were defeated. One of the 
most ominous signs of the movement was the pro- 
minence of Catholic priests, such as John Murphy 
and Roche, whose influence over the Catholic 
peasantry was far more complete than that of the 
lay agitators. At Midsummer, however, Camden 
retired ; and Cornwallis, who, in spite of his failure in 
America, was considered one of the ablest generals in 
the British service, arrived with full civil and military 
powers. Before his vigorous efforts the rebellion 
gave way ; and when, in August, the long-expected 
French expedition arrived at Killala Bay, in the 
north of Connaught, it found its opportunity gone. 
Although the French commander failed, almost 
entirely, to arouse the native population, he pushed 
on to Castlebar, where, on August 27th, Humbert 



3 I 2 PITT 

out-mancEuvred and defeated General Lake. But 
Cornwallis was soon approaching with large forces ; 
and, on September 8th, Humbert was forced to 
surrender at Ballinamuck. The small native risings 
which had taken place were put down with needless 
cruelty. Small expeditions under Napper Tandy, 
and the French Admiral Bompard, were equally 
unsuccessful ; and Wolfe Tone, who was^^with the 
latter's force, was captured and condemned to death 
by a court-martial. There were grave doubts of the 
legality of the sentence ; and Curran succeeded in 
obtaining an order of respite from the King's Bench. 
But the news came too late ; for Tone had, the even- 
ing before, inflicted on himself a fatal wound. 

The immediate danger was now at an end ; but 
the English Government, thorouglily alarmed by 
the peril which English rule in Ireland had just 
encountered, determined upon a step which had more 
than once been mooted in official correspondence 
during the previous two or three years, and which, 
they fondly hoped, would for ever prevent a recurrence 
of the danger. The Viceroy's speech, delivered at 
the opening of the session in January, 1799, hinted, 
not obscurely, at a Legislative Union. Informal 
negotiations with representative men had for some 
months been proceeding ; and, though it was clear 
that there would be violent opposition in certain 
quarters, the Government were not without hopes of 
substantial support, especially from the Catholics. 
This fact is, of course, one of the most powerful 
weapons of those who urge that the Catholics were 
betrayed by Pitt at the time of the Union ; but the 




Photo by\ \_Walker &f Cocker ell. 

LORD CASTLEREAGH (1769-1822). 

Portrait by Sir Thos. Lawrence, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



314 PITT 

fairest conclusion from somewhat obscure evidence 
appears to be, that, while Pitt honestly believed that 
the Union would lead to Emancipation, and was 
himself prepared to work for Relief, he gave no 
definite pledge, and entered into no absolute bargain. 
On such a subject it was easy for both parties to be 
honestly mistaken. 

Unfortunately, the Catholics had no representatives 
in the Irish Parliament ; and the suggestion of the 
Viceroy's speech was met at the outset by violent 
and overwhelming opposition. Though Castlereagh, 
who had recently placed the valuable support of his 
active services at the disposal of the Government, by 
accepting the post of Chief Secretary, conducted his 
case with great skill, an amendment to the Address 
in the Commons was only lost by a single vote, 
almost every member of weight supporting it. One of 
the most powerful supporters of the Opposition was 
Foster, the Speaker, whose opinion carried immense 
weight with the independent members ; and Parnell, 
Ponsonby, Fitzgerald, Barrington, Parsons, Hardy, 
and many others, though some of them had held 
office, pledged themselves to support the Constitution 
of 1782. But Pitt determined to persevere. Owing 
to the secession of the Opposition in the English 
House of Commons, the Ministers had everything 
their own way in that assembly ; and, in the spring 
of 1799, resolutions in favour of the Union were 
easily carried, despite the brilliant and strenuous op- 
position of Sheridan. Thus fortified, the English 
Ministry resolved on measures which, even at that 
time, could only be justified by extreme necessity. 



UNION WITH IRELAND 315 

A large sum of money was devoted to the compensa- 
tion of Irish borough-mongers. Honours of all kinds 
were freely promised. Every pressure that the Castle 
officials could devise was brought to bear. Martial 
law was proclaimed in many parts of the country ; 
and troops were sent over from England in large 
numbers. It was even proposed to introduce a 
body of Russian troops ; but this last insult was, 
happily, spared. Before the opening of the session of 
1800, the Viceroy knew that he commanded a 
majority. There was, of course, no pretence of taking 
the opinion of the country ; and the attitude of the 
Government was clearly shown by the extraordinary 
provision of the final Representation Act, which pro- 
vided that the existing county members should take 
their seats in the first Parliament of the United 
Kingdom without re-election, and that the repre- 
sentatives of the surviving boroughs should draw lots 
for a similar honour. A final bribe to the landowners 
was offered by a Tithe Bill, which definitely legalised 
the refusal of the graziers to pay " tithe of agistment." 
Before the end of March, the Resolutions had passed 
both Houses ; and the Union soon became an accom- 
plished fact, so far as paper could make it so. 

The terms of the measure are very well known ; 
and the briefest summary will here suffice. The Irish 
peerage was to be represented in the Parliament of 
the United Kingdom by twenty-eight members, 
chosen for life by their fellow peers ; the United 
Protestant Established Church of England and 
Ireland by an archbishop and four bishops sitting In 
rotation of their sees, and changing with each session ; 



3l6 PITT 

the Irish Commons by one hundred members chosen 
on the existing franchise, two for each county, and 
the two great boroughs of Dublin and Cork. Many 
of the old corrupt boroughs were disfranchised ; and 
the remaining thirty-one were allowed but one 
member each. Provision was made for the ultimate 
reduction of the Irish peerage to a maximum of one 
hundred ; but a somewhat curious clause allowed an 
Irish peer, not being a representative of his own 
order in the House of Lords, to be elected for any 
constituency in Great Britain. The property qualifi- 
cation of members was assimilated to that of England. 
The two countries were to enjoy equal commercial 
privileges ; and no prohibitions were to be allowed in 
mutual trade, except those specified in a brief schedule 
to the Act. The public debts of the two countries 
were to be kept distinct ; and for twenty years the 
proportion of the actual revenue raised in Ireland 
was to be two-seventeenths, as against fifteen-seven- 
teenths in England. As in the case of the Scottish 
Union, the existing laws of Ireland were to remain 
in force until altered by the Parliament of the United 
Kingdom ; and the existing judicial arrangements, 
with the exception of the appeal to the Irish House 
of Lords, were continued. 

The Irish Union is the last great act in Pitt's 
career. On the first meeting of the Imperial Parlia- 
ment, in 1 80 1, he deemed himself bound in honour to 
introduce a Catholic Relief Bill ; and, failing to obtain 
the King's consent, he tendered his resignation, which 
was, with apparent reluctance, accepted. So far, Pitt 
had pursued an honourable course ; but he allowed 



THE PEACE OF AMIENS 317 

himself, a few months later, to be persuaded into 
giving a promise that he would never again raise the 
Catholic question during the King's lifetime. The 
promise was not made as a condition of a return to 
office ; and the country still watched for two years, 
with grim humour, the spectacle of Addington 
attempting to steer the bark of State in the tornado 
of Napoleonic politics. But the King was, apparently, 
very ill ; it seemed that he had not long to live. And 
Pitt appears to have thought it not worth while to 
run the risk of another Regency, or a violent political 
struggle, to prevent a year or two of delay. As we 
know, the King survived his brilliant young Minister 
by fourteen years ; and the Catholic question 
remained an open sore during that period. 

Meanwhile, the Addington Ministry, backed by 
the generous unofficial help of Pitt, patched up the 
hollow peace of Amiens, and thus gave Napoleon an 
invaluable year of leisure in which to mature his 
ambitious plans. In May of 1803, the great war 
broke out again ; and, with one accord, the eyes of 
the nation turned to Pitt. Even Addington, though 
he never doubted his own supreme fitness for office, 
was prepared to bow to the national prejudice. But 
we have it, on apparently good testimony, that he 
made it the incredible condition of an alliance, that 
the chief position in a new Cabinet should be held 
by a figure-head, in order that he and Pitt might 
stand on an equal footing. So great is British 
respect for vested interests, that this amazing folly 
was allowed to keep out Pitt for a whole twelve- 
month. But at last the position of the country 



3 1 8 PITT 

became too serious to tolerate conventional polite- 
ness. The King was compelled to commission Pitt 
to form a Cabinet. Pitt showed extreme generosity 
by struggling for the inclusion of Fox ; and, when 
the King's almost insane prejudice against him ren- 
dered a breakdown of the arrangements probable, 
Fox, to his immortal honour, not only insisted on 
the withdrawal of his name, but promised his whole- 
hearted support to Pitt's Government. Once more 
at the head of a Cabinet of nonentities, but supported 
by the strong feeling of the country, Pitt plunged 
into the labour of forming a third great Coalition 
against Napoleon. But the task was too much for 
his declining strength. Always weak in health, the 
last few years had pulled him down almost to the 
edge of the grave. The impeachment of Dundas 
(now Lord Melville), for malversation in his old office 
of Treasurer of the Navy, was a mortal blow ; for it 
struck at one of the rare friendships of his life. He 
lived to hear of the glorious victory of Nelson at 
Trafalgar (October, 1805). ^ut the capitulation of 
Ulm, and the disastrous defeat of the Coalition at 
Austerlitz, completed what the impeachment of 
Melville had begun ; and the great Minister died 
at the beginning of 1806, leaving his country 
apparently without a successor, in the day of her 
gloom and despondency. 

It is hardly an exaggeration to have treated the 
history of Pitt, during the years 1784-1806, as the 
history of England. At least so far as politics are 
concerned, everything centred in him. Even when 
he was not the author of a scheme, it depended on 



GOVERNMRNT of CANADA 31$ 

his good pleasure whether it should pass. Mitford, 
in 1 79 1, could not have carried his Catholic Relief 
Bill without the consent of Pitt ; and this measure 
removed many of the harassing restrictions under 
which the English Catholics laboured. ^ In 1792, 
Fox had successfully brought forward his celebrated 
measure, which enabled juries to decide on the whole 
question of an alleged libel, instead of merely finding 
the fact of publication. But if Pitt had opposed the 
measure, instead of supporting it, it could not have 
been carried. Pitt's own great measure for the 
government of Canada in 1791, though it has passed 
almost unnoticed, was a generous recognition of 
colonial progress. The huge colony 2 was divided 
into the two provinces of Upper and Lower Canada ; 
and the Protestant and Catholic populations were 
thus left each to follow its separate destiny. Repre- 
sentative institutions were created for each ; and a 
very beneficent Regulation, laid down in 1775, to 
the effect that occupiers of land should not be com- 
pelled to pay tithes to support a religion of which 
they disapproved, was made permanent, the fund 
thus created being devoted to the endowment of 
Protestant churches. Although Pitt abandoned 
Parliamentary Reform as impracticable at the out- 

^ Catholics were permitted to meet for worship in registered build- 
ings, they were relieved from penalties for non-attendance at the 
worship of the Established Church, and they were allowed to teach in 
private schools. 

- It must be remembered, of course, that the name Canada, in the 
eighteenth century, did not cover the whole territory of the present 
Dominion. Roughly speaking, it included only the present provinces 
of Ontario and Quebec. 



520 PITT 

set of his career, his influence was, until the out- 
break of the French war, almost always on the side 
of liberal movements, such as Wilberforce's great 
crusade against the iniquities of slavery. 

As a personal influence on his age, Pitt may 
be said to have succeeded to the great position 
of his father. He was the inspirer of national 
enthusiasm, the organiser, if not of victory, yet of 
heroic resistance against that overwhelming ambition 
which his father had instinctively foreseen. With 
little of the great Chatham's unerring judgment of 
men, or his swift comprehension of the politics of a 
whole world, he had the same generosity, the same 
contempt for merely personal aims, the same strict 
sense of personal honesty, also, it must be confessed, 
a good deal of the same arrogance and impatience, 
which had distinguished Chatham's career. He had, 
moreover, qualities and attainments conspicuously 
wanting in Chatham. He was, in spite of drawbacks, 
a born Parliamentary tactician. Nothing in the annals 
of the House of Commons has ever equalled the 
confidence and skill with which the youthful Premier, 
in the closing months of 1783, met and defeated an 
Opposition which included the most brilliant orators, 
and the most experienced Parliamentary managers, 
of that or, perhaps, of any other time. And his 
genius for finance, in which the elder Pitt had been 
singularly wanting, enabled him, not merely to 
acquire and keep great influence over the growing 
commercial classes of the country, but to prepare the 
nation to face, with undiminished credit, the appalling 
sacrifices of the great war. 




Photo by\ 



\Walker &r' Cocker ell. 
SIR FRANCIS BURDETT (1770-1844). 
Portrait by Shee, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



322 PITT 

As a permanent factor in the history of English 
politics, Pitt may be said to have done two things. 
In the first place, he broke for ever the system of 
personal government by the King's Friends. No 
doubt, as this chapter has shown, he was more than 
once thwarted by the obstinacy of George III. But 
that is a very different thing from being a tool of the 
Court. After the great event of 1784, Pitt held office, 
not by the favour of the King, but by the popular 
mandate. The very fact of his resignation in 1801, 
is a proof of the change which had come over English 
politics during his tenure of power. North, in 
similar circumstances, would have bowed his head 
and retained his office. It may be said, that Pitt 
acquiesced in his defeat, by resuming office in 1804 
without a recantation by the King. But in 1804 the 
country was in the throes of a continental crisis, 
which would have rendered any attempt to stir great 
domestic issues positively criminal. Even Fox 
admitted this. And it is quite clear that, though 
Pitt recognised the limits of his authority, yet, while 
he was in office, he was the real power in the State. 
He made short work of any traitor or sycophant, from 
Thurlow downwards, who dared to thwart his will. 
In fact, the supreme authority of Pitt in his own 
Cabinets lays him open to the charge of assuming 
too much rather than too little power. With him, 
as with one or two leaders of outstanding authority 
since his day, the essential characteristic of the 
Cabinet System, as a representation of political con- 
nection, as well as of popular approval, was in danger 
of being forgotten. 



CONSERVATISM OF PITT 323 

Finally, Pitt may be said to have reconstituted the 
Tory party as an element in politics. At first 
clouded by suspicion of Jacobitism, then despised 
as the obedient slave of Court influence, the Tory 
party renewed itself under Pitt as the champion of 
legitimate authority, against innovation and specula- 
tive criticism. Pitt, no doubt, called himself a Whig;; 
but he was equally removed from the sordid intrigues 
of the Grenvilles and the Bedfords, and the more 
generous Liberalism of Fox and Sheridan. With the 
rapidly rising Radicalism of Sir Francis Burdett, 
Charles Grey, and Beaufoy, he had absolutely no 
sympathy. It is true that he kept his head in the 
panic of the French Revolution, longer than any other 
prominent statesman ; far longer, for example, than the 
philosophic Burke. But it was inevitable, in his posi- 
tion, that he should become the champion of authority, 
the great exponent of the prerogative, the bulwark 
against the rising waves of reform and anarchy. 
And thus there gathered round him all the defenders 
of the established order, in religion, politics, and 
society. The defeat of the Coalition at the polls in 
1784 may be said to have abolished the Whig country 
gentleman ; the whole weight of that most indepen- 
dent and most respectable section of the House went 
over to the youthful Minister. And when he died, at 
the age of forty-six, the great body of solid citizens, 
both in Parliament and the country, whom he had 
trained and persuaded into an unwavering loyalty to 
the Government, became the backbone of that new 
Conservative party which was to fight the battle 
against Reform. 




XI 



REACTION AND REFORM 



The nine years which followed the death of Pitt 
were, almost entirely, years of war ; but of a war 
which, unlike the diplomatic struggles of the 
eighteenth century, had a profound and permanent 
effect on the social organisation of Europe. The 
dying statesman had touched the secret which 
explained alike the apparently incredible success of 
Napoleon, and his ultimate downfall. Europe, said 
Pitt, had trusted in vain to her Governments to stem 
the tide of French aggression ; she must now rely 
upon the energies of her peoples. At last it was 
beginning to dawn upon the minds of the ruling 
classes, that the irresistible might of France was due 
to a Revolution which, for the first time in modern 
history, had enabled a country to put aside those 
traditions, class prejudices, and vested interests, 
which had bound with meshes of iron the wholesome 
sinews of the nation, and stifled its best brains with a 
numbing code of etiquette. This was the true 
explanation of the astounding fact, that the ragged 

324 



FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC AFFAIRS 325 

troops of the Republic, led by inexperienced boys, 
had over-run a terror-stricken Europe, beaten the 
finest armies of Austria and Russia on many a 
battlefield, and shaken down thrones and principali- 
ties, while the subjects of the conquered States looked 
idly on, more than half in sympathy with the invaders 
of their native lands. Only on the sea, where the 
bad traditions of the old order still hampered the 
gallant efforts of the French sailors, were the foes of 
France victorious. And there the French yielded to 
the English navy, which, almost alone of English 
institutions, recognised simple merit, rather than 
birth or inherited wealth, as a title to command. 
The hard conditions of life at sea offered no attraction 
to the incapable parasites of a Government majority, 
who greedily absorbed the commissions in the army, 
and the ofifices in the civil service. 

True it is that, almost from the very first, the 
French war had been supported in England by 
the great bulk of the nation ; and England had 
therefore been the soul of the opposition to the 
aggressive crusade of the French Directory. After 
the first outburst of enthusiastic sympathy with 
the Revolution had passed away, the great mass 
of the English people had turned indifferently from 
that abstract philosophy of Rousseau, which had 
lashed the French into democratic fervour. The 
Englishman had grievances enough of his own ; but 
they were not those of the French peasant and 
artisan. Bad as the English Government was, and 
unsympathetic as were the ruling classes to the 
new life which was springing into being with the 



326 REACTION AND REFORM 

Industrial Revolution, there was, in England, little of 
that systematic oppression of the poor, that heartless 
parade of Court folly, that reckless squandering of 
the national resources, which had disgraced the reign 
of Louis XV. And so it is probable, that Burke's cele- 
brated Reflections on the Revolution in France^ unjust as 
they are to France, and lamentably wide of the true 
causes of the Revolution, really represent the feelings 
of the average Englishman in 1790. There is in 
them little of that philosophic grasp which makes 
the Thoughts on the Present Discontents a masterpiece 
for all time. They are disfigured by exaggerations 
and bitterness, that mark the writer as stricken with 
a panic which clouds his better judgment. The 
Burke of 1770 would not, surely, have spoken of 
" the profaneness of talking of the use, as affecting 
the title to property " ; nor would he, in his senti- 
mental pity for an insulted King and Queen, ^ have 
forgotten the groans of the millions who had suffered, 
in silent agony, under the oppressions of the ancien 
regime. But, in abandoning the lofty standard of 
his earlier style, in adopting the specious arguments, 
the want of taste, the gross prejudices which dis- 
figure the pages of the Reflections on the Revolution 
in France^ it is probable that Burke, perhaps for the 
first time in his life, appeared as a truly representa- 
tive man. At any rate it is clear that, in England, 
despite the influence of Paine's works, and the 
teachings of Price and Priestley, the philosophy of 
the Revolution never obtained any real hold on the 

' It must be remembered that Burke's pamphlet was written long 
before the proceedings of the Convention had become really violent. 




ymw*^ 



^ 



THOMAS PAINE (1737-1809). 
Portrait by Jarvis. 



328 REACTIOM AND REFORM 

people ; and it is intensely significant of the differ- 
ences of national character that, in France, the forward 
movement should have been dominated by the flimsy 
rhetoric and graceful style of Rousseau, in England 
by the solid argument and the sesquipedalian prose 
of Bentham, Mill, Mackintosh, Romilly, and the rest 
of the Utilitarian school. 

All the more disgraceful, therefore, was the conduct 
of the successive Ministries which, in England, under- 
took the task of stamping out free thought and free 
speech. It is often loosely urged, that the vital 
necessity of presenting a united front against French 
aggression alone impelled the Ministers to a course 
of action which they detested. But, unhappily, the 
facts will not accord with this plausible theory. The 
gagging policy of the period falls into three distinct 
stages, only one of which is covered by the French 
war. There is, first, what may be called the 
" Erskine " group of cases, in which that distin- 
guished advocate succeeded, on almost every occasion, 
in procuring the acquittal of the prisoner ; thereby 
demonstrating, by the best of proofs, that the 
Government had not even the excuse of popular 
opinion to back it. This group includes the prosecu- 
tion of Baillie (1778) for showing up a nefarious job 
of Lord Sandwich at Greenwich Hospital ; of the 
Dean of St. Asaph (1784), for publishing a pamphlet 
by Sir William Jones on Parliamentary Reform ; and 
of Stockdale (1789), for publishing Logan's defence 
of Warren Hastings. Inasmuch as the States- 
General did not meet at Versailles till after the last 
of these prosecutions had been ordered, the excuse 




Photo by\ [ Walker df Cockerell. 

THOMAS, LORD ERSKINE (175O-1823). 

Portrait by Sir William Ross, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



330 REACTION AND REFORM 

of the French war hardly avails in these cases. 
Second, there is the string of measures which begins 
with the prosecution of Paine (1792), continues with 
those of the Morning Chronicle (1793), Walker 
(1794 — the '* popgun" case), Frost (1795), and the 
monstrous attempt to convict Hardy, Home Tooke, 
Thelwall, and others, of "constructive" treason 
(1794), and culminates in the Treason and Sedition 
Acts, and the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act 
1795. For this series, there is, of course, the excuse 
of the French war. But, when the national risings 
in Europe had culminated in the crowning victory of 
Waterloo, when Napoleon had been banished to a 
lonely rock in the Atlantic, when Paris had been in 
the hands of the Allies, then, one might have thought, 
the rulers of the peoples would have turned with 
gratitude to the masses whose blood and courage had 
delivered them from destruction, and frankly invited 
their co-operation in the reconstruction of European 
society. Instead of this happy result, we find, on 
the Continent, the Holy Alliance, formed with the 
half-avowed purpose of stifling popular aspirations, 
and, in England, the brutal code known as the Six 
Acts. 

For this last stage of the gagging policy the best 
excuse is, perhaps, the striking dearth of first-rate 
ability in the ranks of the official classes. The 
death of Pitt had been closely followed by that of 
Fox, whose Ministry of " All the Talents" (1806) 
is remarkable chiefly for an attempt, happily never 
repeated, to include the Chief Justice of the King's 
Bench (Lord Ellenborough) in the Cabinet. In 



THE INDUSTRIAL WORLD 33 1 

spite of the presence of Lord Sidmouth (Addington) 
the Ministry of 1806 was undoubtedly, even after the 
death of Fox, a Whig body ; and its acceptance, in 
1807, of Wilberforce's famous measure for the aboH- 
tion of the slave trade, shows that it was prepared 
to give evidence of its faith. Its proposal in the 
same year, to allow Catholics to receive commissions 
in the army and navy, was a further sign of vitality. 
But the Ministry, if well meaning, was lamentably 
weak. Not a single man of real strength of character 
was to be found in its ranks. And, at the bid- 
ding of the King, it consented (though the royal 
permission to introduce the measure had been pre- 
viously obtained), to withdraw the Catholic Bill. 
Such contemptible conduct met with the fate which 
it deserved. The King was emboldened to demand a 
further pledge from his Ministers, to the effect that 
they would not even mention to him, at any time, 
the subject of the Catholic claims ; and the duped 
Cabinet, now realising the true position of affairs, 
resigned in March, 1807. 

With the resignation of the Grenville Cabinet, the 
real interest in domestic matters passes away from 
the governing classes to that new industrial world 
which was growing so rapidly in England, and of 
which, it is to be feared, the rulers of the country 
knew but little. The note of the long series of Tory 
Governments, which stretches from the elections of 
1807 to the elections of 1830, is mediocrity. The 
successor of Pitt, designated, it is said, by the dying 
Minister himself, was Perceval, an amiable, but not 
inspiring lawyer, who, at first under the nominal 



332 REACTION AND REFORM 

leadership of Portland, and afterwards in his own 
name, maintained a steady attitude of resistance to 
the new social forces, till his assassination in 1812, 
On his death, the lead passed to Lord Liverpool, a 
son of that Jenkinson who, in the last days of the 
eighteenth century, had most worthily represented 
the dying traditions of " personal government." 
Liverpool, though the old King had now definitely 
relapsed into imbecility, inherited much of his 
father's policy ; and the Prince Regent, having long 
ago renounced that Whiggism which he had professed 
as the friend of Fox and Sheridan, likewise adopted 
his father's views. The only men of real mark in the 
political world were Canning, whose untimely death 
in 1827 removed the last hopes of a peaceful 
solution of pressing problems, and Huskisson, a 
great financier, whose personal weight was, however, 
too small to sway the policy of the Cabinet. The 
real Director of the Government measures, during 
the long and dreary period of reaction, was Lord 
Eldon, a fanatic hater of reform in all its aspects. 

Perhaps we may date the definite beginning of 
the strife in 1809, when the terrible scandal connected 
with the name of the Duke of York, the King's second 
son, excited widespread indignation in the country. 
The Duke, as Commander-in-Chief of the army, 
had repeated, on a somewhat smaller scale, the 
abominations of the days of Charles II. and 
George I., when the favour of a royal mistress had 
been the surest road to promotion. But a far more 
important step in the direction of reform, was the 
founding, in the year 181 1, of the two great associa- 



POPULAR DISCONTENT 333 

tions for popular education, the Royal Lancastrian 
(afterwards the British and Foreign Schools) 
Society, and the National Society for Educating 
the Poor in the Principles of the Established Church. 
A natural result of the spread of popular education 
was the enormous success of Cobbett's Political 
Register, v^h\c\\ m the year 181 5, boldly reduced its 
price from a shilling and a halfpenny to twopence, 
and at once became the first really popular newspaper. 
The close of the war was marked by an immediate 
outburst of popular discontent. The high prices 
obtained by the manufacturers during the continu- 
ance of hostilities fell rapidly ; and the long-antici- 
pated expansion of commerce did not take place. 
The Continent was, in fact, too exhausted by the 
terrible drain of the war, to purchase goods in large 
quantities ; and the establishment of a Protectionist 
policy abroad still further hampered English foreign 
trade. The disbanding of the troops swelled the 
ranks of the unemployed ; and the iniquitous Corn 
Law of 181 5, in addition to its damaging effects on 
the import trade, sent the prices of necessaries up to 
a famine standard. The absurd system of Poor 
Relief, inaugurated by the " Speenhamland Act" of 
1795, showed the deficiencies of Gilbert's Act (1782) 
in the clearest light. The idle labourer, who married 
and begat children in reckless disregard of the con- 
sequences, and who had been looked upon as a 
national benefactor when the market for recruits was 
high, was now a source of real danger to the country ; 
for his wants were supplied by the vicious practice of 
supplementing wages from the rates ; whilst the 



334 REACTION AND REFORM 

thrifty artizan, whose decent pride maintained him in 
a hopeless struggle with falling wages and increasing 
prices, and whose income was not swelled by inflated 
rents, bore the chief brunt of the distress. Quite 
naturally, the artizan classes took advantage of their 
newly acquired knowledge, to organise for the im- 
provement of their condition ; and the Trade Union 
movement, and the celebrated co-operative experi- 
ments of Owen, mark the period as one of the seed- 
plots of modern industrial conditions. The first of 
these developments came into direct conflict with 
the repressive policy inherited from the social system 
of the Middle Ages ; and it was on this point that 
the first victory of Reform was won. 

A series of mass meetings held at Bermondsey, in 
the winter of i8i6-7,under the turbulent leadership of 
William Hunt, thoroughly alarmed the Government ; 
and when, in the following February, the Regent 
was insulted on his way to open Parliament, a 
definite campaign of suppression was organised. 
The Habeas Corpus Act was once more suspended ; 
and the famous circular of Lord Sidmouth, addressed 
to the Lieutenants of the counties, recommended 
wholesale arrests of suspected persons. A new 
Sedition Act was hastily passed ; and, despite the 
"Derbyshire Insurrection" of the same year (i 817), 
it seemed as though the Government would win an 
easy victory. But the feelings of the nation were 
now thoroughly roused ; and the violent and brutal 
repression of the Peterloo meeting near Manchester, 
with which the Government openly identified itself, 
brought the country to the verge of civil war. In 



DEATH OF GEORGE III. 335 

the existing state of Parliamentary representation, 
popular feeling had no chance of making itself heard 
in the House of Commons, except by agitation ; and 
the elections of the Peterloo year itself (1819) had 
given the Government a huge majority. This 
majority the Government proceeded to use, by 
enacting a repressive code which, for completeness 
and brutality, stands alone in English history. The 
" Six Acts," as they were termed, entirely prohibited 
the using of arms except under official authority, and 
authorised the magistrates to search all houses in 
which weapons were suspected of being concealed. 
They forbade the assembling of any open-air meeting 
of more than fifty persons without previous notice to 
the magistrates ; they strengthened the already 
severe laws against libel ; they deprived persons 
accused of misdemeanours of the time previously 
allowed them for preparation of their defences ; and 
they extended the newspaper duties to periodicals, 
which had hitherto escaped. 

The year which followed the passing of the Six 
Acts is of some mark in English political history. 
The death of the old King was, in itself, an unimpor- 
tant event ; for George III. had ceased for nearly ten 
years to take any share in public matters. The great 
blessing of oblivion, that real consolation of old age 
for public men, had come to him ; the nation had 
long since forgotten the appalling series of blunders 
and obstinacies which condemn George III., in the 
judgment of the historian, as one of the very worst 
monarchs who ever occupied the throne of England. 
The generation of 1820 knew him only as a harmless 



336 REACTION AND REFORM 

and forsaken old man, of blameless private character, 
overwhelmed by domestic grief. But the horrible 
scandal connected with the prosecution of the Queen 
of George IV., the vindictive conduct of the new 
King, his coarse extravagance at a time of great 
national distress, the indiscreet policy of the Queen 
herself and her advisers, the resignation of the one 
Minister (Canning) who was credited with popular 
sympathies, all tended to alienate the country from 
the Government, and even from the institution of 
monarchy itself The formal adoption of the title of 
" Radical" by the extremer members of the reforming 
party, and the gradual introduction of the modern 
terms of " Conservative " and " Liberal," in the place 
of the former " Tory " and " Whig," all mark the 
passing away of the older order, and the approaching 
triumph of popular government. Baffling as are the 
minor changes within the sacred circle of office during 
the next few years, the great lines of national cleavage 
shew themselves with clearer and clearer distinct- 
ness. There is a powerful party which represents 
vested interests, including the landowners, the clergy, 
and the wealthier among the professional classes, 
whose new name of " Conservatives " marks a substi- 
tution of loyalty to established institutions for the 
older Tory attachment to the person of the monarch. 
Then comes the less numerous, but more active and 
intelligent party known as the '' Liberals," which 
comprises the more advanced of the older " Whigs," 
and wins its way amongst the rising classes of 
successful manufacturers and smaller professional 
men, open to ideas of material advancement, but 




Photo by\ \\Valker b= Cockerell. 

RIGHT HON. GEORGE CANNING, M.P. (1770-1827). 

Bust by Chantrey, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



338 REACTION AND REFORM 

somewhat unsympathetic towards popular ambitions. 
Finally, we see the new and powerful body of 
Radicals, composed almost entirely of the artizan 
classes, active, numerous, and passionately devoted to 
the new order ; but ill-organised, and liable to split 
up in the many conflicting claims of its enthusiasms. 
In this last body we may clearly trace two distinct im- 
pulses — the impulse towards political reform, no doubt 
the indirect result of the French Revolution, the belief 
in political power as in itself a good thing ; and the 
impulse towards social regeneration, which uses 
political enthusiasm as a lever, but counts it only as 
a means to an end. The former impulse, headed 
by such men as Hunt, Cobbett, and Hone, ends 
finally in Chartism ; the latter, under the far abler 
guidance of men like Place, Parkes of Birmingham, 
Owen, and Joseph Hume, works steadily for improved 
education, sanitation, hours of labour, and similar 
direct benefits. 

It is curious that the first great Radical victory was 
won in a Tory House of Commons with the greatest 
apparent ease. As a matter of fact, the absurd state 
of the franchise was, in this instance, the most 
powerful safeguard of the Reformers. A Parliament 
which contained even a fair representation of manu- 
facturers would hardly have repealed the Combination 
Laws without a desperate struggle. But the great 
landowners had not yet come to regard a combination 
amongst agricultural labourers as a possibility ; and 
they looked with complete indifference upon the 
sweeping measure which Joseph Hume, under the 
skilful guidance of Place, piloted through Parliament 




Photo by\ [Walker &= CockerelL 

JOSEPH HUME (1777-1855). 

Portrait by J. W, Walton, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



340 REACTION AND REFORM 

in 1824. With great wisdom, the few Radicals in 
the House of Commons treated the Bill as of slight 
importance, and refrained from making speeches 
The great anxiety of the framers of the measure 
seems to have been to discourage uninformed rivals, 
with schemes of their own, and to overcome the 
scruples of Lord Lauderdale, who approved of the 
measure, but thought it beneath the dignity of the 
Lords to read evidence printed by the Commons. 
Scarcely a legislator appears to have realised — not 
even such men as Huskisson and Peel — that, in 
abolishing a set of barbarous old statutes. Parliament 
was implicitly sanctioning one of the most powerful 
social forces of the coming time. Strangest of all, 
even Place himself and his friends seem to have 
thought that the measure would be the end of Trade 
Unionism, which they regarded merely as a protest 
against the antiquated laws which made it felony to 
summon a " Chapiter or congregation " of masons, 
and a misdemeanour to attend it, and a penal offence 
" not to enterprise what another hath begun," and, 
generally speaking, treated the artizan as the unworthy 
slave of the capitalist. It should not be forgotten, 
however, that much of the confidence with which the 
measure was received, was due to the able advocacy 
of McCulloch, the Scotch economist. 

Scarcely had the Bill of 1824 become law, when 
the manufacturers took alarm. The triumph of the 
previous summer had, undoubtedly, excited the hopes 
of the artizans to an unreasonable degree. During 
the autumn of 1824, although trade was good, several 
strikes occurred ; and the employers quickly realised 



THE WORKING-CLASS MOVEMENT 34 1 

that the old machinery of repression was now gone. 
They besieged the doors of the Ministers, and soon 
made important converts of Huskisson and Peel, ^ 
who, on the reassembling of Parliament in the spring 
of 1825, led a motion for a Committee to inquire into 
the working of the Act of 1824, supporting their 
proposal by speeches well calculated to arouse the 
prejudices of the vested interests represented in the 
House. The one-sided attitude of the Ministry is 
well shown by the fact that their resolution, as finally 
carried, limited the scope of the Committee to an 
investigation of the conduct of the workmen ; and that 
this was no accident is proved by the further fact, that 
the Government representatives on the Committee 
stoutly refused to entertain any enquiry respecting 
the conduct of the employers But they were dealing 
with a man who, though he never sat in Parliament, 
proved himself a past master in the arts of Parliamen- 
tary warfare. True, urged Place, that the wording 
of the Committee's reference excluded a direct 
enquiry into the conduct of the employers ; but 
it certainly did not confine the enquiry to the 
conduct of workmen against whom allegations 
of misbehaviour were made. Accordingly Hume, 
at Place's instigation, insisted on the admission 
of many respectable leaders of the working-class 
movement ; and their evidence was most damaging 
to the partial and prejudiced testimony brought 
forward by the employers. The Government 

' It is somewhat singular that Mr. Thursfield, in his monograph 
on Peel, does not (apparently) allude in the most distant way to Peel's 
conduct on the repeal of the Combination Laws. 



342 REACTION AND REFORM 

behaved with scandalous unfairness, refusing, in 
many cases, the expenses of the men's witnesses, 
speaking of the accused men as " acquitted felons," 
and striving to keep the proceedings of the Com- 
mittee a dead secret. But they were no match for 
the tireless energy of Place and his friends, who 
actually persuaded the Attorney-General Copley 
(afterwards Lord Lyndhurst) to refuse to draw up 
the Government measures. The powerful Radical 
press began a campaign of agitation in the country. 
Place openly defied the Committee, who threatened 
to commit him for contempt, but were not foolish 
enough to put their threats into execution. One 
by one the obnoxious clauses of the new measure 
were abandoned, and, finally, the repealing Act of 
the previous year was virtually re-enacted, with the 
addition of one or two sections directed against 
intimidation ; while the right of combination to 
reduce hours of labour and increase wages was 
expressly admitted. 

Thus ended the first great legislative triumph of 
the Reform Party. It would be unfair to ascribe 
the opposition to the measure entirely to selfishness. 
There were, no doubt, a large number of humane 
men in the ranks of the Government supporters, and 
even among the employers, who believed that the 
welfare of the country depended on the main- 
tenance of a system which left the interests of 
the labourers and artizans at the mercy of the 
propertied classes. This view was a natural inheri- 
tance from the status system of the Middle Ages ; 
and it may, in its origin, have been justified by 



CONDITION OF IRELAND 343 

facts. But the conditions had wholly changed. The 
capital of the country was rapidly passing from the 
hands of the landowners to those of the great manu- 
facturers, who had made their fortunes by precisely 
the same methods which they now proposed to forbid 
to the artizans. Many of the latter, owing to the 
zeal of the educational reformers, and the spirited 
efforts of the Benthamites, were quite as capable of 
exercising their own judgments, as the landowners and 
capitalists themselves. The old Combination Laws 
had, doubtless, nominally controlled the employers as 
well as the operatives. But it was notorious that, 
as regarded the former, they had long been a dead 
letter. Nay, with the repeal of the Apprenticeship 
Laws, and the abandonment of the system of fixing 
wages by the Justices, the capitalists had definitely 
rejected the old scheme of labour regulation, much 
to the dislike of the labouring classes ; and thus there 
was no reasonable excuse for the retention of the 
Combination Laws. 

In the next great development of Reform, the 
centre of interest is shifted from England to 
Ireland. The results of the Union had, at first, 
appeared to be favourable to the smaller country. 
The artificial inflation in the prices of agricultural 
produce, due to the long war and the Corn Laws, 
multiplied the number of small holdings ; for the 
great proprietors, confident in being able to secure 
the votes of their tenants, adhered to the practice 
of creating forty-shilling freeholds. But the 
increase in rents led to extravagance on the part of 
the gentry, and, as the abolition of the Dublin 



344 REACTION AND REFORM 

Parliament reduced the attractions of the Irish 
capital, the evil of absenteeism rapidly increased. 
In the absence of its natural leaders, the control of 
the Protestant interest naturally passed to the middle 
and lower ranks of the north ; and Orangeism, with its 
bitter prejudices, was deliberately fostered by the 
English Government, as a means of maintaining the 
English supremacy. With the close of the war, the 
natural reaction followed ; and many of the evils 
of 1793 reappeared. The financial arrangements of 
the Union had, in the unanimous opinion of the Royal 
Commission of 1894, "imposed upon Ireland a burden 
which, as events showed, she was unable to bear " ; 
and matters were not remedied by the consolidation, 
in 1 816, of the National Debts of the two countries. 
The enormous increase in the expenditure of Great 
Britain during the war had borne hardly upon the 
revenues of Ireland ; for the ratio of taxation between 
the two countries had been fixed by the Union at 7J 
to I, and, while the wealth of Great Britain supported, 
with comparatively slight difficulty, the increased 
burden, the effort was too much for the sister 
island. This assertion is abundantly proved by two 
significant facts. While in Great Britain 71 per cent, 
of the expenditure, during the years 1 801-16, was 
defrayed by taxation, and only 29 per cent, by loans, 
in Ireland only 49 per cent, could be raised by taxa- 
tion, leaving 51 per cent, to be obtained by loan. 
And, though the fiscal arrangements of both countries 
were, of course, in the hands of the British Ministers, 
it was found impossible, long before the end of the 
war, to raise the Irish loans in Ireland, so great was 



I 




DANIEL O'CONNELL, M.P. (1775-1847). 
Portrait by David Wilkie. 



346 REACTION AND REFORM 

the exhaustion of the country. The war had, in 
effect, saddled Ireland with an enormous debt 
(upwards of in millions), the interest on about 
80 per cent, of which was payable to British fund- 
holders. Nevertheless, no change in the ratio of 
taxation was made in 1820, when the period fixed 
for revision by the Act of Union arrived. Finally, 
even the fiscal reforms of Huskisson threw an 
additional burden on Ireland ; for the sweeping 
abolition of Customs duties on the imports peculiar 
to Great Britain, imposed heavier taxation on the 
staple articles which were common to the two 
countries. 

At this juncture, the cause of Ireland was cham- 
pioned by the greatest political agitator of modern 
times, Daniel O'Connell. A fervent Catholic, a 
superb orator, a skilled and successful advocate, a 
man of great judgment and astuteness, an indefatig- 
able worker, a ^kindly character — he was ideally 
fitted, not only to arouse enthusiasm amongst his 
fellow-countrymen, but (which was even more import- 
ant) to restrain it within moderate bounds. He 
found the Catholic cause languishing from the ineffici- 
ency of its aristrocratic leaders, and hampered by a 
split over the famous question of the '' Veto," i.e., the 
proposal, favoured by the Papal See, to allow the 
State a veto on the appointment of Catholic bishops 
Obtaining a seat on the Catholic Committee, he rapidly 
assumed the direction of its affairs ; and from that 
moment (about 18 10) the claims of the Catholics 
assumed a new energy. O'Connell at once grasped 
the fact, that the establishment, in 1795, of the 



347 

Catholic College at Maynooth, had placed a new 
and powerful weapon in the hands of the Catholic 
party. Before this date, the bulk of the Irish priest- 
hood had been, if not foreigners, at least educated 
abroad ; and although, in the later stages of the 
Rebellion, their influence had been felt, they were, in 
general, largely alien in sympathies from the masses 
of their flocks. But now the native priests, educated 
at Maynooth, had obtained a firm hold on the 
peasantry ; and the improvement in their material 
condition, and the increased efficiency of their minis- 
trations, resulting from the repeal of the persecuting 
laws, had rendered them a real power in the land. 
With the priesthood O'Connell entered into a firm 
alliance ; and when, in 1823, he formed the Catholic 
Association, they rallied as one man to his standard. 
Catholic Emancipation was preached from every 
Catholic pulpit ; and the " Catholic Rent," the sub- 
scriptions of the poor, soon became a formidable 
fund, available, not only for the purpose of direct 
agitation, but for the defence of the Catholic 
peasantry against every form of oppression. 

It cannot be denied also, though O'Connell would 
have been unwilling to admit the fact, that the 
Parliament at Westminster was a far more hopeful 
tribunal in the matter of the Catholic claims than the 
old packed Parliament on College Green. In spite of 
the obstinate prejudices of George III., a very con- 
siderable body of Whigs had always favoured 
religious equality. The Liverpool Ministry of 181 2 
had expressly treated Catholic Emancipation as an 
open question. Canning was known to sympathize 



348 REACTION AND REFORM 

with it, and Canning was looked upon as the man of 
the future. Another rising politician, Lord John 
Russell, gave it his hearty support. Castlereagh was 
known to be in favour of it. The Radicals were, of 
course, bound to approve it. Grattan's Bill of 1813 
was lost only by a minority of four. Even the 
House of Lords, in 18 16, only rejected a motion in 
favour of Relief by four votes. In 18 17, as has been 
said, a measure throwing open the Army and Navy to 
Catholic officers was carried without serious opposi- 
tion ; and, in the same year, and again in 18 19, 
Grattan's motions in the House of Commons were 
only defeated by the narrowest majorities. In 1821, 
after Grattan's death, a Catholic Relief Bill actually 
passed the Lower House ; and, in 1822, the Ministry, 
under the influence of Canning, definitely adopted a 
measure to admit Catholic Peers to the House of 
Lords. 

But, by this time, the fears of the Protestants had 
been thoroughly aroused ; and they determined to 
repeat the move which had, so often before, been 
successful in disappointing the hopes of the Catholics. 
Their great champion. Lord Eldon, approached the 
King, and soon persuaded the feeble mind of George 
IV. that, by consenting to a Catholic Emancipation 
Bill, he would be violating that Coronation Oath by 
which he had bound himself to maintain the Protes- 
tant religion as by law established. It is not to be 
wondered at that George IV. should have somewhat 
vague ideas as to the value of an oath. But it is 
indeed surprising, that men of trained intellect, pro- 
fessing legal and constitutional knowledge, should 




LORD ELDON (175I-1838). 
Portrait by Sir Thos. Lawrence, P.R.A,, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



3 so REACTION AND REFORM 

have gravely pretended to believe in a fallacy which 
had been exposed even before the end of the seven- 
teenth century, and which is, further, of so patent an 
absurdity, that even a schoolboy might laugh at it. 
When William of Orange swore to maintain the 
Protestant religion, he made a solemn promise for 
himself and his successors to the country which he 
had been invited to govern ; but he never promised 
to thwart the wishes of that Parliament which 
had conferred upon him the Crown. Even if it be 
admitted, that Catholic Emancipation involved a 
failure to maintain the Protestant religion (a very 
large admission), there cannot be the smallest ground 
for saying that an assent by the Crown, in its legisla- 
tive capacity, to a measure which had received the 
sanction of both Houses of the legislature, would 
have been a violation of the Coronation oath. The 
object, the perfectly well known and avowed object, 
of the Coronation oath, was to prevent a repetition 
of the conduct of James II., who, in his Executive 
capacity, had defied and evaded the express law of 
the land, and acted contrary to the wishes of the 
great majority of his subjects. It was never intended 
to prevent legislative changes, sanctioned by the 
legislature of the country. It is a cardinal principle 
of the Constitution, that no authority can tie the 
hands of the Crown in Parliament, — not even an 
express Act of Parliament itself To deny such a 
proposition, would be to deny the possibility of pro- 
gress, and to assert, that unborn generations may be 
for ever subjected to the despotism of long-dead 
ancestors, exercised in circumstances wholly different 



RELIGIOUS TOLERATION 35 1 

from those of the present day, and without a possi- 
bihty of foreseeing or considering the altered con- 
ditions of a future time. 

It is, therefore, much to be regretted, that Lord 
Liverpool's Ministry, in its later days, though allow- 
ing measures of Catholic Relief to be passed in the 
Commons again and again, sat idly by whilst they 
were thrown out by the House of Lords. At last, 
however, with the death of Lord Liverpool, and the 
accession to power of Canning ( 1 827), the prospects 
of the Catholics brightened ; for Canning steadily 
refused to pledge himself to oppose them. So 
certain did it seem that the new Minister would take 
up the subject, that the extreme Tories, Wellington, 
Peel, and Eldon, retired from office. But the sudden 
death of Canning once more dashed the hopes of the 
reformers ; and when, after the troubled period of 
Lord Goderich's premiership had come to an end 
(1828), the seals of office were once more entrusted 
to the Duke and Feel, it seemed as though all hope 
were gone. 

But, in truth, the very apparent hopelessness of the 
situation called out the fighting qualities of the 
reformers. Almost immediately upon the Duke's 
assumption of office. Lord John Russell's Bill 
for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts 
secured the assent of Parliament. To outward 
seeming, this measure effected little change, for the 
Test and Corporation Acts had long been rendered 
nugatory by annual Indemnity Acts, which absolved 
from legal penalties those persons who had acted in 
defiance of the old restrictions ; and, as a matter 



352 REACTION AND REFORM 

of fact, Lord John Russell's measure was chiefly 
directed to the relief of Protestant dissenters.^ But it 
was a hopeful augury ; and, though the Ministry 
became even more sternly Tory by the withdrawal 
of Huskisson and the " Canningite " Whigs in the 
same year (1828), O'Connell determined on a bold 
stroke. The Ministerial changes consequent on the 
withdrawals necessitated the re-election for the county 
of Clare of Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, who had been 
appointed President of the Board of Trade. Mr. 
Fitzgerald was a popular man, not unfavourable to 
Catholic claims. Nevertheless, the Catholic Associa- 
tion determined to oppose him. It had previously 
secured, against the opposition of the landowners, the 
return of Protestant candidates who pledged them- 
selves to Catholic Relief It now resolved to secure 
the election of a Catholic. O'Connell himself was put 
forward ; and, in spite of Ministerial prestige and 
territorial support, in spite of the fact that O'Connell's 
victory would mean at least temporary disfranchise- 
ment of the constituency (for of course the Liberator, 
as a Catholic, would not take the Parliamentary 
oath), Fitzgerald was hopelessly beaten. 

The effect of the move was electrical. It threat- 
ened, not merely Protestant ascendency, but social 
security. What had been done in County Clare 
could be done at the next election in two-thirds of 
the Irish constituencies. If the Association chose, it 

' This was the second of Peel's three famous "surrenders." The 
first was on the currency question of 1819, the last on the Corn Laws. 
Mr. Thursfield has happily characterised Peel's greatness as that of 
"insight rather than foresight." 




RIGHT HON. SIR ROBERT PEEL, BART., M.P. (1788-1850). 
Portrait by Linnell, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



354 REACTION AND REFORM 

could, instead of putting forward honourable Catho- 
lics, who could not take their seats, nominate hireling 
Protestants, who would strictly obey orders. A new 
power, of incalculable consequence, would thus be 
introduced into the House of Commons. Worse still, 
it was impossible to say how long O'Connell would 
be able to retain the control of those forces which he 
had hitherto so admirably kept within the bounds of 
order. The Protestant Orangemen and " Bruns- 
wickers," highly organised, were spoiling for a fight ; 
and the myrmidons of the Association, equally well 
drilled, were hardly the men to baulk them. 

The Duke surveyed the situation with the cool eye 
of an experienced general ; and decided for sur- 
render. Peel, already more than half convinced, 
agreed. How the prejudices of the King were over- 
come will never be exactly known ; but, after some 
hesitation, he gave a reluctant consent. The sterner 
Tories were furious. Peel was the special object of 
their hatred ; and upon him the storm fell. He 
deemed it right to resign his seat for Oxford 
University, was beaten by Sir Robert Inglis at the 
new election, and with difficulty secured a seat at 
Westbury in time to take charge of the Government 
measure in the House of Commons. But the docile 
followers of the Government, supported by the force 
of the Whig Opposition, triumphed over all obstacles. 
A meaningless Bill was passed, in February, 1829, for 
the suppression of the Catholic Association. The 
forty-shilling freeholders in Ireland were disfran- 
chised by a measure which raised the qualification to 
£iQ. But the emancipating Bill, after passing the 




LORD BROUGHAM (i77g-i868). 
Portrait by James Lonsdale, In the National Portrait Gallery, 



356 REACTION AND REFORM 

House of Commons by a very large majority, was 
carried in the Lords by a substantial margin ; and 
received the royal assent on April 13th. All offices 
and positions in the State, with one or two important 
exceptions, were thrown open to Catholics ; and 
the Oath of Supremacy was modified, to enable them 
to sit in Parliament. 

On June 26, 1830, George IV. died ; and on July 
24th Parliament was dissolved. There followed 
immediately an event which gave a powerful impulse 
to popular feeling in England, viz., the French 
Revolution of July. Charles X., the Bourbon King, 
attempted to abolish, by a coup dEtat, the liberty 
guaranteed by the Constitution of 181 5. He failed 
ignominiously, and fled the country, being replaced 
by Louis Philippe, the head of the Orleanist branch 
of the royal house, with a Charter of public liberties. 
Polignac, the arbitrary Minister of the deposed King, 
was an intimate friend of Wellington ; and his failure 
reacted strongly on the English constituencies. At 
the elections in August the Tories lost heavily, and, 
not content with the warning, took their revenge of 
Peel, by deserting the Government on Sir Henry 
Parnell's motion for a reform of the Civil List. The 
Ministry was defeated, and resigned ; and a Whig 
Cabinet, under the leadership of Earl Grey, came 
into office. Before the defeat of the Government 
there had been a great cry for Parliamentary 
Reform ; and Brougham had secured a place for a 
motion on the subject on the very day before the 
resignation. The new Ministers refused to take 
office, except on the condition that Reform should 



PARLIAMENTARY REFORM 357 

be a Cabinet measure ; and the King, who was 
credited with Liberal sympathies, accepted the 
terms. Thus, almost before it had realised the fact, 
the country was plunged into a great national 
struggle ; for Wellington had but a few weeks before 
stated his complete and unqualified opposition to 
the movement. And Peel was passionately with 
him. 

The rival parties now marshalled their forces. 
On the one side were the clergy, the landowners, 
the army and navy, the universities and the Inns 
of Court, and the government officials — in a word, 
the vested interests of the country. On the other 
stood the manufacturers of the North, the shop- 
keepers and small tradesmen, and the great mass 
of the new artizan classes. The Cabinet behaved 
with great wisdom. They eliminated their brilliant 
but indiscreet supporter, Brougham, from the House 
of Commons, by offering him the splendid prize of 
the Great Seal. The nominal leadership of the 
Commons was entrusted to Lord Althorpe, a popular 
and loyal member of the Cabinet ; but the intro- 
duction of the great measure was reserved for a 
younger man of greater tact and ability, though of 
no commanding genius. A Committee, consisting 
of Lord Duncannon, Lord John Russell, Lord 
Durham, and Sir James Graham, was appointed to 
draw up alternative schemes. Two plans were 
produced by this Committee. That of Lord 
Durham proposed to divide the country into equal 
electoral districts, and to assign a member to each. 
This scheme represented, of course, the views of the 



358* REACTION AND REFORM 

Radicals. It appeared to have the merits of justice 
and simpHcity ; but it had also one fatal defect. It 
could not have been carried without a violent 
revolution. Lord John Russell's plan was thoroughly 
characteristic, both of English methods, and of the 
views of that great Liberal party which he, perhaps 
more than any other man, represented and formed 
into coherent action. It proposed to disfranchise 
entirely fifty of the smallest and most corrupt 
boroughs, and to deprive fifty more of half their 
representation ; to add the seats thus gained to the 
counties and the large towns ; to substitute for the 
anomalies of the borough franchise an uniform rental 
qualification of a comparatively small amount ; and 
to add the same qualification to the existing county 
franchise. Though the plan involved a measure of 
great length, its general outline was perfectly simple ; 
it involved no decided breach with the past ; it 
destroyed nothing which any reasonable man could 
defend ; and, at the same time, it satisfied the 
aspirations of those who saw that the old Whig 
plan, of peddling with details, had already been 
condemned on all sides. When, after the Christmas 
recess. Lord John Russell introduced the measure 
to the House of Commons in a singularly skilful 
speech, it was received by the whole of the reforming 
elements in the country with an almost unanimous 
shout of welcome ; and the opponents of Reform 
settled themselves down, with a dogged persistency, 
to dispute the Bill inch by inch. At last the battle 
was to be fairly fought out. 

Perhaps it is necessary here to explain very briefly 




Photo by\ 



{Walker b' Cockerell. 
LORD JOHN RUSSELL (1792-1878). 
Portrait by Sir Francis Grant, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



360 REACTION AND REFORM 

the features of the old electoral system, which 
aroused so much ill-feeling in the country. From 
the earliest days of the House of Commons, the 
county representation had been fixed at two members 
each ; and a statute of the reign of Henry VI. had 
confined the county franchise to those having " land 
or tenement to the value of forty shillings by the 
year at least." This somewhat vague enactm.ent, 
originally intended as a restrictive, not as an enabling 
measure,! had long been construed to mean, that 
ownership of a freehold estate in land worth at least 
£2 a year was the sole qualification for the county 
franchise. This qualification would, with the long 
continued fall in the value of money, have placed the 
county franchise on a very democratic footing, but 
for the fact that, with the disappearance of the 
yeoman class, and the substitution of tenants holding 
under leases for years or yearly tenancies, small 
freeholds had almost entirely disappeared from the 
country districts, with the evil exception of those 
created expressly for voting purposes. Thus, the 
wealthy farmer, however long his lease, the copy- 
holder, however substantial, and the retired trades- 
man, who lived in a hired house, were totally excluded 
from the county franchise, which was wholly in the 
hands of the great landowners, the beneficed clergy,2 

^ The origin of the county franchise is wrapped in obscurity. Even 
so early as the fifteenth century it was a matter of dispute. 

^ When Archbishop Sheldon, in 1663, somewhat irregularly re- 
nounced, on behalf of the Church, the privilege of voting the clerical 
taxation in Convocation, the beneficed clerg}' obtained votes in respect 
of their parsonages and glebe lands. The same transaction ultimately 
gave rise to the claim of the clergy to stand for Parliament, a claim 



THE BOROUGH SYSTEM 361 

and such dependents of great families as had been 
given cottages for their Hves. Notwithstanding these 
anomalies, the political reputation of the counties 
stood high ; and it is almost certain that no great 
popular feeling could have been aroused by a 
scheme to reform their representation alone. In the 
eighteenth century the landowners, many of them 
Whigs, had stood manfully against the corruption 
of the Court ; and it was not until the appearance 
of the Indian " Nabobs," with their boundless wealth, 
that county elections became venal. 

Very different was the position of the Parliamentary 
boroughs. The principle on which these were origi- 
nally selected is a matter upon which historians fail to 
agree ; but it is clear that, for at least a century after 
the establishment of the House of Commons, the 
choice of borough constituencies fluctuated from elec- 
tion to election, and was largely in the discretion of 
the Crown officials. In the fifteenth century the right 
to return members to Parliament began to be granted 
by corporation charters ; ^ and these, of course, could 
not be violated in quiet times. But many of the 
boroughs were only too anxious to escape the honour 
of being represented, which involved the payment of 
higher taxation, and the wages of their members. 
And it long remained easy for the Crowni to alter 

which was successfully asserted by Home Tooke in 1801, but 
formally abolished in the same year. The exclusion applies to clergy- 
men of the Established Church, whether beneficed or not, and to 
Catholic priests ; but not, of course, to the Protestant dissenting 
clerg>'. 

' The little borough of Much Wenlock, in Shropshire, claims (I 
know not with what accuracy) to be the oldest example of this practice. 



362 REACTION AND REFORM 

the balance of parties in the House of Commons by 
the expedient of sending writs to boroughs, not 
hitherto represented, which were peculiarly under 
Crown influence. I With the growing importance 
of the House of Commons in the sixteenth century, 
this practice was freely adopted ; and the boroughs 
thus created ultimately became the rottenest of the 
" rotten boroughs " of the Reform time. The pre- 
rogative of the Crown to create new constituencies 
of this kind fell into disuse at the end of the seven- 
teenth century ; 2 and thus, at the very epoch in which 
the development of commerce, and the growth of 
new industries, were rapidly shifting the whole balance 
of interests, and building up new towns of great 
wealth and population, the representative system 
became rigid and unalterable, save by Act of 
Parliament. So clear was the case for Reform, that 
even the sweeping measures of the Long Parliament, 
adopted by Cromwell in 1654, met with the approval 
of so strong a royalist and conservative as Lord 
Clarendon, who describes the step taken by Cromwell 
as " an alteration fit to be more warrantably made, 
and in a better time." 

But the anomalies of distribution did not end the 
evils of the borough system. The anomalies of the 
franchise were still worse. There was no uniform 
qualification like the forty shilling franchise in the 
counties. The writs directed to the boroughs had 
usually been silent on the methods of election ; 

^ E.g.^ in the Duchy of Cornwall. 

^ The last example of the creation of a Parliamentary borough by 
mere writ is said to have been Newark, in 1673. 



ANOMALIES OF THE FRANCHISE 363 

and only here and there had an Act of Parliament 
interfered. As a consequence, the franchise was, in 
each case, governed purely by local custom ; and the 
confusion and uncertainty were almost unfathomable. 
In some instances the owners of certain tenements 
were alone allowed to vote, in others the town council 
monopolised the franchise, in others the right was 
vested in the freemen of certain industrial gilds, in 
others a still smaller body, such as the leet jury, 
claimed the sole privilege of voting, in others the 
monopoly was claimed by certain mysterious persons 
known as " potwallopers ; " only in a few cases all 
the burgesses paying " scot and lot " were entitled. 
This evil extended far beyond its obvious conse- 
quences ; for it gave rise to endless disputes about 
the results of elections, and these disputes were, at 
any rate until the passing of Grenville's Act in 1770, 
decided by committees of the House, or by the 
House itself, on the purest principles of party 
prejudice. One of the minor evils of the old state 
of affairs was, the inordinate length of the time 
during which the poll was kept open ; an evil which, 
combined with a process of open voting, led directly 
to the practice of bribery and intimidation. But 
perhaps enough has been said to explain the 
situation in 1831. 

It may appear incredible, that men of eminence 
and public spirit should be found to defend in 
principle the anomalies of the unreformed system. 
But they who find a difficulty in believing the facts 
underestimate the tenacity of vested interests. When, 
by the Revolution of 1688, the supreme control of 



364 REACTION AND REFORM 

the country passed, virtually, to the House of 
Commons, the possession of a seat in that body 
became an object of great value. Its holder, if he 
were a man of wealth, birth, or ability, might hope 
to rise to the highest offices in the State ; its patron, 
who could secure the return of his own nominee, was 
a person courted by Ministers, and could look forward 
to peerages and other honours. The small boroughs 
became the prey of the neighbouring landowners, 
often, it is to be feared, the willing prey. The little 
bodies of voters organised themselves for corruption. 
They appointed agents to deal with offers, to receive 
the price, and to divide it among the conspirators. 
Or, they were coy ; they hung back until the close 
of the poll, to strike a harder bargain. If they were 
the governing body of the town, they were thought 
to be unusually honest if they offered their votes to 
a nobleman who would undertake to act as the 
treasurer of the municipality, and defray its deficit 
out of his own pocket. The Corporation of Oxford, 
caught in the act of such a bargain in 1768, saw its 
mayor and aldermen committed to Newgate by a 
House of Commons which was indignant at the 
stupidity which had allowed the discovery to be 
made ; but the worthy magistrates, nothing daunted, 
continued their negotiations with the Duke of Marl- 
borough and Lord Abingdon from the comfortable 
security of the gaol. As the competitive instinct 
grew, patrons became more and more sordid, and 
openly accepted the highest bids. The Government, 
finding it easier to deal with a few patrons than to 
risk the unknown chances of an open election, 




Photo dy] [IValker &= Cocker ell. 

THE GREAT DUKE OF WELLINGTON (1769-1852). 

From Siborne's History of the Waterloo Campaign. 



366 REACTION AND REFORM 

defended the system as one of the curious but 
valuable mysteries of the British Constitution. It 
became almost an axiom that the business of the 
country could not be carried on in any other way. 
The Duke of Wellington, on the very eve of the 
Reform Bill, declared it to be his solemn conviction, 
that the legislature and the system of representation 
possessed, and deservedly possessed, the full and 
entire confidence of the country. In all probability, 
more than half the members of Lord Grey's Cabinet, 
in their hearts, disliked Lord John Russell's measure. 
It was, in fact, an attack on property ; and few owners 
of property can be brought to see that their own 
property is unjustifiable, though they may be willing 
enough, on occasion, to confiscate that of others.^ 

Thus, as so often happens, that which was really 
the most potent, though not the most conclusive 
argument in the great struggle, could not be openly 
urged by the more respectable of the party which 
relied on it. For it is the best proof of the unsound- 
ness of the argument from vested interests, that its 
champions were ashamed of their weapons. The old 
transcendental method, which had proved so alluring 
in the magic setting of Burke's eloquence, now fell 
somewhat flat ; for Wellington and Peel were not the 
men to repeat Burke's dazzling rhetoric. When 
Burke urged that the constitution was a great living 



* The men who resisted the abolition of the patronage of Gatton 
and Old Sarum in 1831, had cheerfully abolished the franchise of 
thousands of Catholic freeholders in 1829. But perhaps the argument 
was, that the franchise is not property, though the patronage of the 
franchise is. 



THE REFORM BILL 367 

organism, palpitating with the subtle breath of ancient 
wisdom, and mysteriously intertwined in all its parts, 
so that an attack on one meant the imminent peril of 
the whole, men, ready to be convinced, felt that the 
teachings of philosophy were on their side. When 
Wellington and Peel, Sir Robert Inglis and Sir 
Charles Wetherell, expressed their conviction that the 
existing scheme represented the wisdom of ages and 
the perfection of human reason, their hearers had the 
uneasy conviction, that a vulgar dread of change was 
the real inspiring force of their arguments. The old 
sophistical plea that the rotten boroughs had brought 
to light such shining stars as the elder Pitt and 
Burke, Charles James Fox and George Canning, was 
repeated with wearisome iteration ; but the crude fact 
was, that this phosphorescence of decay had long 
ceased to shine, and that the patrons of close boroughs 
were now usually actuated in their nominations by the 
most sordid of motives. Had the great borough- 
owners really exercised their power as a sacred trust, 
the fate of the Reform Bill might have been very 
doubtful ; but the judgment of Heaven was upon 
them. The Opposition soon abandoned all general 
principles, and confined themselves to arguments of 
detail, wearisome, shallow and uninspiring, destined in 
the long run to fail. 

The actual history of the measure is well known, 
and may be briefly disposed of The Bill was intro- 
duced into the Commons on March i, 1831, and, on 
the 2 1st of the same month the second reading was 
carried by the majority of a single vote. One of the 
most remarkable of the speeches on the second 



368 REACTION AND REFORM 

reading was that of O'Connell, now duly seated for 
Clare, who, though he declared Ireland to be hardly- 
treated by the measure, announced his intention of 
lending it his hearty support. The narrow majority 
on the second reading meant, of course, certain defeat 
in Committee ; and, on April 22nd, General Gascoyne 
succeeded in carrying an amendment, to the effect 
that the total representation accorded to England 
and Wales should not be reduced. The point was 
not one which vitally affected the measure, and it 
was, in fact, afterwards conceded by the Ministry. 
But it was clear that nothing could save the Bill in 
the existing House ; and the Cabinet determined to 
follow Pitt's precedent of 1784, and appeal to the 
constituencies. They acted with promptitude and 
decision. A Cabinet meeting was held on the very 
day of Gascoyne's victory ; and the Ministers, with 
audacious boldness, ordered preparations for a dis- 
solution to be made without obtaining the King's 
consent. After a somewhat critical interview with 
his Majesty, Lords Grey and Brougham succeeded in 
overcoming the royal scruples ; and Parliament, which 
had sat for less than six months, was dissolved. 

The result of the elections showed, beyond question, 
the feeling of the country. An overwhelming majority 
of Reformers was returned, in spite of all the efforts of 
the borough owners. The Cabinet was strengthened 
by the inclusion of Lord John Russell, and the fiery 
and brilliant Stanley, afterwards the great Earl of 
Derby. A new measure, almost identical with that 
of the previous session, was introduced by Lord John, 
and, on the /th of July, the second reading was carried 




Photo by\ \}Valker b^ Cocker ell, 

CHARLES, EARL GREY (1764-1845). 

Portrait by Sir Thos. Lawrence, in the National Portrait Gallery. 



370 REACTION AND REFORM 

by the substantial majority of 136. Immediately 
afterwards, the Government gave a somewhat equi- 
vocal proof of its intention to repress the forces of 
disorder, by conducting a prosecution against Cobbett, 
one of the fiercest champions of Reform, for an 
article which had appeared in the Political Register. 
Cobbett escaped through the disagreement of the 
jury ; but it was well known that only two of its 
members were for an acquittal. The majority for 
the second reading was large ; but the Opposition were 
unbeaten, and, as a last refuge, now looming grimly 
in the near future, stood the House of Lords. 

The fight now went on in Committee. Through 
wearisome days and nights the disfranchisement of 
each rotten borough was fiercely disputed. Advan- 
tage was freely taken of the fact, that the Government 
calculations had been based on the census of 1821, 
though the census of 1831 was approaching com- 
pletion. There was no real reason to suppose that 
the results of the latter returns would in any way 
weaken the case for Reform ; but the argument served 
to plead for delay. At last, on August i8th, the 
Opposition secured a memorable victory. The 
Marquis of Chandos moved to add to the pro- 
posed qualifications the " £^o occupation clause." 
This amendment aimed, of course, at conferring 
the county franchise on mere tenants-at-will, or 
at least, on tenants from year to year, a class 
peculiarly liable, from the uncertainty of their 
holdings, to vote according to the wishes of their 
landlords. The clause was thoroughly mischievous, 
not only for its effect on the purity of elections, but 



BILL REJECTED BY THE LORDS 37 1 

because it would encourage the practice, so inimical 
to good agriculture, of taking land on insecure tenure. 
But it was a masterly piece of tactics ; for it placed 
the Government which opposed it in the fatal position 
of appearing to deprecate an extension of the franchise. 
As a fact, many of the Government supporters voted 
for the amendment, which was carried by a majority 
of 81 ; and the Ministers, not daring to appeal to the 
country on such an issue, meekly accepted their 
defeat. 

An agreed amendment in the borough qualifica- 
tions substituted the ^lo occupation franchise for the 
original £\o rental clause ; and then the measure, 
after a few more days of wrangling, was read a third 
time on September 19th, and passed the House of 
Commons three days later. 

The eyes of the country were now turned anxiously 
upon the House of Lords. Until the end of the 
eighteenth century, that body, despite its anomalous 
position, had never been unpopular with the people 
at large. For one thing, there never had been much 
jealousy of social exclusiveness, or even political privi- 
lege, in England. Sensible men have a quiet contempt 
for such things, ambitious men hope to win them, 
ignorant and vulgar people admire them. For 
another, the House had never been, until the close of 
the eighteenth century, a slave to one party in the State. 
From the Revolution until the Ministry of Lord 
North, it had been very independent of the Govern- 
ment of the day, slightly Whig in its feelings, not 
undignified in its debates. But it had been ruined 
by Pitt, who had crammed it with obedient tools of 



372 REACTION AND REFORM 

the Government, men promoted for their wealth or 
party influence, rather than for their character or 
their talents. It is a striking fact, that the fierce 
opposition in the Lords to the Reform Bill came, 
almost entirely, from the new peerage and from the 
bishops, while the holders of ancient titles were 
warmly in its favour. ^ Unhappily, the new peerage 
and the episcopal bench were in a majority ; and, 
on October 8th, the Bill was rejected by a vote of 
199 against 158. 

Two questions were now freely discussed. Would 
the King consent to create new peers for the purpose 
of carrying the Bill ? Would the Ministers offer a 
compromise ? 

Both these questions were of serious moment. The 
former enthusiasm of the King for Reform was 
known to have grown weaker. The malign influence 
of Lord Eldon was again at work ; and he was backed, 
in spite of personal differences, by the more splendid 
talents of his successor, Lord Lyndhurst, beside 
whom the new Lord Chancellor, Brougham, with all 
his brilliance, was an undignified figure. The 
precedents for the creation of new peers were few, 
though, happily, the most important had been 
furnished by the Tories,^ All the leading members 
of the Cabinet were either peers or sons of peers ; 

' It was alleged that, on the division of October 8, 1831, of the 
representatives of peerages created before 1790, 108 voted for the Bill 
and only four against it ; while, of the peers of later creation, 150 voted 
against the measure and only 50 for it. I do not pretend to have 
verified the figures, which rest on the authority of Mr. Molesworth. 

^This was, of course, in 17 12, to procure a majority for the Peace of 
Utrecht. 



REFORMERS Al WORK 373 

and they were known to regard with great repug- 
nance the prospect of inflicting a serious blow upon 
the independence of their own order. 

So it was with real apprehension that the 
Reformers spoke of the possibility of " compromise." 
P'or it was felt that any " compromise " which would 
soothe the feelings of the Opposition would be 
fatal to the chances of a substantial measure ; 
while the circumstances of the moment pointed 
unmistakably in that direction. Disturbances in 
the country gave the opponents of Reform only 
too good an excuse for playing upon the fears of the 
propertied classes. A combination between the 
Whig section of the Cabinet and the more moderate 
Tories might have proved fatal to the Ministry and 
the Bill. But the Times was fervently, even scur- 
rilously, in favour of Reform ; and the great majority 
of the Press followed suit. The Reformers outside 
Parliament worked night and day to convince the 
Ministers of the unabated confidence of the country. 
It was pointed out, with perfect truth, that the one 
step which produced an immediate effect in allaying 
disturbances, was an announcement by Ministers of 
their unalterable determination to carry their measure; 
while any sign of weakness was a signal for out- 
breaks. The Birmingham Political Union organised 
gigantic meetings. Other great towns followed suit, 
and the different local societies soon became the 
National Political Union, with its headquarters in 
London, largely directed by Place, who, with 
indomitable energy and a real genius for organi- 
sation, fought the advocates of " compromise " on the 



374 REACTION AND REFORM 

» 

one hand, and the " Rotundanists," ^ who advocated fli 
extreme sociaHstic measures, on the other. Encour- 
aged by these demonstrations, the Cabinet determined, 
after a short prorogation, to re-introduce the measure. 

On December 12, 183 1, Lord John Russell 
accordingly brought into the House of Commons 
the third Reform Bill. In order to soothe the 
Opposition, a few of the minor amendments, previously 
put forward by them, were embodied in the Bill ; 
but its essential character was unaltered, and, indeed, 
the addition of a few seats to the populous towns 
may be regarded as a strengthening of its principles. 
There was little debate this time ; and the great 
majority of two to one, by which it passed the second 
reading, is proof of the fact that the House of 
Commons at least did not believe in the vaunted 
"reaction." In the Lords it soon became evident 
that tactics were to be changed. The Bill actually 
passed the second reading on April 14, 1832, by 
the narrow majority of nine. But a specious amend- 
ment by Lord Lyndhurst, to alter the course of 
discussion, was accepted as a challenge by the 
Ministry, now confident of success ; and, on the accep- 
tance of the amendment by the House, the Cabinet 
placed its resignation in the hands of the King. 

Now occurred the last and most dangerous crisis 
of the whole process. The King, having accepted 
the resignation of his Ministers, consulted Lord 
Lyndhurst, who advised him to send for the Duke 
of Wellington. The Duke, though he expressed 

* So called from the fact that they met in a building known as 
*' The Rotunda," near Blackfriars in London. 



PASSING OF THE BILL 375 

himself willing to assume office if no more suitable 
leader could be found, suggested Peel. But Sir 
Robert, who was at the time personally unpopular 
in the country, as well as with his own party,i could 
not face the situation ; and, no other person being 
possible, the Duke undertook the heroic task of 
forming a Ministry. 

The step was accepted as a declaration of war by 
the country. Place and his friends initiated a 
masterly move by threatening a run on the banks, 
and huge placards, containing only the words — • 
"To Stop the Duke, 
Go FOR Gold," 
appeared, as by magic, all over the country. The 
effect was instantaneous. Place's more cautious 
friends were horrified ; but the event proved Place's 
superior sagacity. The commercial classes, instead 
of being offended by the advice, acted upon it. This 
was clear proof that the agitation for Reform was not 
the work of the rabble. Even the bankers sympa- 
thised with the movement. The stocks fell rapidly. 
At last the iron courage of the Duke gave way. The 
King gave a written promise to Lord Grey to create 
as many peers as should be necessary to secure the 
passing of the Reform Bill ; and the opposition in 
the Lords was doomed. It had been foolish from 
the first, from the point of view of its promoters ; for 
it had set the valuable precedent, that the constitution 
of each House is as much a matter for the other 

' He was, of course, unpopular with his own party for his surrender 
on CathoHc Emancipation. But his new police force (the "Peelers") 
rendered him also unpopular with the masses. 



3/6 REACTION AND REFORM 

as for itself. If the Lords may object to a reform 
of the Commons, desired by the Commons them- 
selves, the Commons may insist on a reform of the 
Lords, though it be opposed by the Lords them- 
selves. 

The passing of the Reform Bill, which speedily 
followed the return of the Grey Cabinet to office, 
marks the end of the old order and the commence- 
ment of the new. The Reformed Parliament totally 
defeated all the malicious prophecies of those who 
alleged, that its meeting would be the signal for an 
outbreak of violent revolution. But it did set about 
the much-needed overhauling of the social and 
political fabric with skill and zeal ; and the changes 
which took place between 1832 and 1840 made 
England almost unrecognisable by the survivors of 
the older system. Slavery was abolished throughout 
the Empire ; the grievances of the new industrial 
workers were taken in hand ; the Poor Law system 
was re-organised ; the Established Church of England 
was warned by the creation of the Ecclesiastical 
Commission to set its house in order ; and the 
monstrous endowments of the Protestant Establish- 
ment in Ireland were pared down. The corrupt 
municipal system of local government was swept 
away ; the grievances of tithe collection were 
abolished : the newspaper stamp duty was reduced to 
a minimum ; and popular education definitely, though 
gradually, acquired recognition as an object of State 
care. Most of these reforms were effected before the 
accession of Queen Victoria, whose reign of almost 
unbroken peace and progress, whose popularity and 



I 




WILLIAM WILBERFORCE, M.P. (1759-1833). 
Portrait by J. Rising. 



378 



REACTION AND REFORM 



whose strength, were due largely to the almost ideal 
virtues of her own character, but largely also to the 
heroic efforts of those who had, in the last few years 
before her accession, broken down the barriers of 
social and political prejudice, without letting in the 
flood waters of revolution. 




XII 



HISTORY AND CRITICISM 



It remains now only to summarise the causes 
which have been at work to produce that curious 
development of British politics whose progress we 
have endeavoured to trace, and to point out a few 
of the chief consequences which have resulted from 
the acceptance of the system. 

In seeking for the general causes which have 
led to a particular historical development, we look, 
naturally, in two directions. On the one hand, we 
try to detect the dominant convictions, aspirations, 
and prejudices which have swayed the actors in the 
drama ; on the other, we study to seize those features 
of the environment which have helped or hindered 
these personal forces. History written exclusively 
from the former standpoint is literary history; his- 
tory written from the latter is scientific history. 
To be complete, history should be both literary 
and scientific. 

It may be assumed, with tolerable safety, that the 
force behind the political movement of the later 

379 



380 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

seventeenth century, was no abstract passion for 
republicanism. If that passion had ever been a 
powerful factor in English politics, it had been 
thoroughly discredited by the experience of the 
Commonwealth ; and, indeed, the more progressive 
statesmen of the period had to reckon, not on popular 
enthusiasm for liberal ideas, but on a steady popular 
opposition to anything that savoured of reform. The 
nation was, in fact, just in one of those moods of 
reaction, in which it was prepared to uphold and 
cherish every abuse which could be invested with 
the halo of antiquity. Even Hobbes' speculations, 
daring as they seemed to his contemporaries, led 
their author into championship of the ancient order. 
And, though Locke's great influence ultimately went 
the other way, it is by no means clear that the abso- 
lute and arbitrary exercise of authority, against which 
he so nobly protests, was not, in his own mind, as 
likely to be asserted by a republican assembly as by 
a monarch.! 

But, if there was no abstract passion for re- 
publicanism, still less for social equality, in the 
statesmen of the late seventeenth century, there 
grew up in their minds a fairly strong conviction 
of the practical dangers of a jiwe divino monarchy. 
The strongly legal cast of mind which the more 
honest among them had inherited from the older 
heroes of the Parliamentary struggle — from Coke, 
Eliot, Pym, Selden, St. John, and Maynard — caused 
them to cling tenaciously to the constitutional side 

^ See especially Two Treatises of Civil Government, Bk. II. cap. xi. 
[Of the Extent of the Legislative Power.) 



I 



DISTRUST OF ABSOLUTE MONARCHY 38 1 

of the English kingship. The Conservative Oppo- 
sition which had begun the Civil War, and which 
afterwards severed itself from the more extreme 
spirits who carried it to a triumphant conclusion, 
revived with the Restoration. All serious statesmen 
recognised the legal checks on the prerogative im- 
posed by such venerated monuments of antiquity as 
Magna Carta, the Confirmatio Cartarum, the Statute 
of Tallage, and the first Treason Act of Edward VI. ; 
and they were not prepared to give up even more 
modern safeguards, such as the Petition of Right and 
the Triennial Act. They were not quite clear how 
these checks were to be enforced against a king who 
desired to defy them ; for, in the flush of victorious 
royalism, all men, cleric and lay, held fast to the 
sacredness of the royal person. But it may safely 
be said that, with the exception of the extreme 
High Church and Tory party, no considerable body 
of Englishmen was prepared, even in the years 
immediately following the Restoration, to profess 
adhesion to the doctrine of an absolute monarchy. 
Charles II. was far too shrewd a man to put the 
patience of his loyal subjects to a violent test. As 
has been said, for the first few years he walked warily ; 
and, even when increasing confidence begat reck- 
lessness, he ventured no open defiance of the law. 
Unhappily, it soon became clear that there was, even 
within legal bounds, abundant scope for mischief If 
the King chose to squander in idle extravagance 
the money voted by Parliament for carrying on the 
business of the nation, he could not be accused of 
breaking the law. Parliament might talk about 



382 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

refusing supplies ; but such a course, though not with- 
out precedent, would really have harmed the nation 
more than the King. For out of the large heredi- 
tary revenues granted at the Restoration, the King 
could supply his personal needs. The real sufferers 
by the refusal of supplies would have been the public 
officials and the navy. If the King chose to fill the 
offices of State with worthless parasites, no one could 
allege that he acted beyond his legal powers ; for all 
public offices were in his gift. If, grown yet more 
selfish and callous, he chose to sell the nation's honour 
to the French Court, and to sign a treaty which 
delivered up. the nation's allies to the vengeance of 
their foes, there was no legal redress ; for the treaty- 
making power was, unquestionably, by the Law of 
the Constitution, vested in the Crown. During the 
later years of Charles' reign, the conviction slowly 
forced itself upon the reluctant minds, even of ardent 
royalists, that the power for evil lodged in the hands 
of a vicious and heartless king was abundantly 
great. Men so different in position and character 
as Clarendon, Guildford, Temple, and Pepys, saw the 
fact, and lamented it ; and yet they shrank, as did all 
but the scattered remnants of the Puritan party, from 
anything that might recall the days of the Long 
Parliament. There seemed to be no way out of the 
difficulty. 

But a man's wits are often sharpened by the 
pressure of personal danger ; and it has more than 
once happened, that a statesman who has failed 
to avoid an awkward situation, has shown much 
dexterity in extricating himself from it. The loyal 



OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY 383 

maxim — the King can do no wrong — had a sound 
complement, that the royal commands are no excuse 
for wrongdoing. And so the official who alleged, as 
excuse for misbehaviour, the personal orders of the 
king, found himself met by the polite fiction which 
declined to credit the existence of such orders —with 
the logical consequence, that he was held to have 
been the author of his own misdeeds. It had never 
been necessary for the success of an impeachment, to 
prove actual illegality on the part of the accused. It 
was sufficient that his conduct was disapproved by 
the highest tribunal in the land, whose judgment had 
been invoked by the representatives of the people. 
The impeachment of Danby showed that this sound 
rule of law had survived the storm of Restoration 
loyalty. And, as it became lamentably clear that, 
despite his easy good nature, Charles was not the 
man to risk a hair in defence of the servant whom 
he had exposed to popular vengeance, men with 
estates and character to lose began to shrink from 
the dangerous honour of public office. The fate of 
Strafford stood as a warning beacon in the path 
of ambitious men ; for no one could for a moment 
imagine that Charles would be more heroic than 
his father. This may well have been one reason 
why mere adventurers like Bennet, Will. Coventry, 
Berkeley, and Downing, found it easy to secure high 
office, and still more easy to lose it. 

But if, in one way, the prospect of holding high 
office in the State thus became less attractive to 
men of position, in another its allurements became 
more intense. For Charles II. was the first English 



384 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

monarch since the battle of Bosworth who was pre- 
pared to play the part of roi faineant : to leave the 
realities of power in the hands of his Ministers, whilst 
contenting himself with the luxuries of royalty. His 
grandfather, James, had been hoodwinked, no doubt, 
by his favourites. But Charles, who could not be 
hoodwinked, was too idle to care for power, and 
gladly transferred the cares of State to more willing 
shoulders. It was a superb opportunity for men of 
real ambition ; and it is hardly to be wondered at 
that such men only waited until they could discover 
some bulwark, more trustworthy than royal favour, 
against the storms of Fate, before plunging once 
more into the race for power. 

This bulwark they found in political connection. No 
Minister could stand alone against the hostile criticism 
of disappointed rivals. But it might well be that, by 
a combination of interests, a group of Ministers might 
defy attack, at least an attack based on no very stable 
grounds. This was really a novel feature in the 
politics of the later seventeenth century. The strong 
hand of the Tudor monarchy had bound each in- 
dividual Minister closely to the service of the Crown; 
but it had not tolerated concerted action amongst 
Ministers. We can imagine the wrath with which 
Henry VHI. or Elizabeth would have heard of secret 
meetings of the royal officials. Strong political asso- 
ciation had appeared among the heroes of the Long 
Parliament; but they were in opposition, not in office. 
That the defection of Strafford should have aroused 
deep feelings of resentment, may be regarded as a 
sign of change, a change which was gradually to 



THE NEW TENDENCY 385 

transform the character of English politics. It 
was in this respect that the Cabal of 1667 antici- 
pated a modern Cabinet ; and the disfavour with 
which the experiment was regarded is proof of the 
novelty of the situation. Ill-assorted as were the 
members of that notorious body, and devoid of 
principle, it was recognised that they, as well as 
their more respectable successors, the "Junto" of 
1697, depended for their safety, not merely on the 
favour of the Crown, but on their mutual good offices 
and interests. And it is clear, that the new device 
was looked upon as an unwarranted encroachment 
on the prerogative. 

At the critical moment, however, the new tendency 
was powerfully stimulated by events. Charles II. 
had, on the whole, kept within the law. His 
successor defied it ; and defied it in such a way as to 
arouse the hostility, both of the nation and the 
nation's leaders. The passionate loyalty of the High 
Church party gave way before James' attempt to 
Romanise the English Church. It became clear that 
something more was necessary than the refusal of 
supplies, or the impeachment of Ministers. The 
prerogative had to be shorn of its power for evil ; 
the King himself had to be removed. The former 
proposition involved the latter ; for James was not 
the man to place fetters on his own limbs. 

But the task involved extreme danger ; for, of 
course, it entailed the commission of that high crime, 
which ceases only to be a crime when it is successful. 
No one could doubt, that failure would entail the last 
penalty of the law, even if it did not once more 

6 



386 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

involve the nation in civil strife. It is no wonder 
that the actors in the drama took anxious counsel 
together. The famous letter to William v/as much 
more than an invitation to the Prince of Orange. 
It was a guarantee of the mutual loyalty of the 
subscribers. Macaulay, with his usual dramatic 
force, has told us how Nottingham, who at first gave 
his adhesion to the invitation, afterwards felt bound 
by conscientious scruples to withdraw it. But the 
Tory leader realised fully the effect which his with- 
drawal was likely to produce upon his former 
associates ; and, probably to protect himself against 
the danger of assassination, he voluntarily offered his 
life as a pledge of his secrecy. It is creditable alike 
to the characters of Nottingham and the Whig 
leaders, that no precautions were taken to ensure the 
Earl's silence. 

It is hardly too much to suggest, that the exciting 
and anxious months, which virtually decided the 
form of the Revolution, also gave a powerful, stimulus 
to the growth of political connection. It is true that 
the invitation to William was signed by Tories as 
well as by Whigs — by Compton and Danby, as well 
as by Devonshire and Shrewsbury. But, in the 
discussions which followed the landing of the Prince 
of Orange, it was clear that the Tories already half 
repented of their action. At any rate, it is certain 
that their efforts were directed mainly towards 
restricting the change to the narrowest possible 
limits ; whilst their opponents, the Whigs, were bent 
on effecting a substantial alteration in the Consti- 
tution. And, as time went on, it became more and 



WHIG ORGANISATION 38/ 

more evident that, given ordinary prudence on the 
part of the exiled House, the Tories were fully pre- 
pared to retrace their steps. Thus, first by the 
labour of their efforts to effect a firm settlement, and 
afterwards, from a growing sense of danger, the 
Whig leaders drew closer together, until at last they 
formed a united group, with much of the cohesion 
which marks a modern Ministry. No doubt they had 
their private quarrels : but, to the outside world, they 
presented an unbroken front. 

It could not, however, escape their sagacity, that a 
small group of great noblemen and officials, unable 
to count on the special favour of the Crown, and not 
backed by any great following in the country, 
occupied, in spite of the talents of its members, a 
somewhat insecure position. The Tory organisation 
lay ready to hand, in the parochial machinery of that 
institution which then exercised such a powerful 
influence in the country, the Established Church. 
The Whig leaders determined to organise a corre- 
sponding machinery, by collecting together all those 
elements which, by nature or circumstances, seemed 
likely to stand firmly in favour of the Revolution 
settlement. The nucleus lay, of course, in the 
survivors of the old Exclusionist party, the men who 
had supported the Bill which, in 1679, had threatened 
to shut out James from the succession to the throne. 
These men could urge, with great show of reason, 
that, if their plan had been adopted, all the troubles 
of James' reign would have been avoided. Much of 
their strength lay, no doubt, in the dissenting con- 
gregations which, even under the iron, system of the 



388 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

Restoration, had caused no little anxiety to the 
supporters of exclusive orthodoxy. The dissenters 
had received substantial benefits from the Revolution ; 
for the Toleration Act of 1689 had been a real 
advance towards religious liberty, and, though it had 
actually been introduced by the Tory Nottingham, 
those who gained by it some degree of freedom of 
worship felt that they owed their liberty to the Whig 
leaders, who had made the Revolution an accom- 
plished fact. The Whig leaders had also been 
mainly instrumental in restoring to the chartered 
towns those rights of self-government of which they 
had been shamelessly deprived by the Ministers of 
Charles and James ; and, though they had deservedly 
failed in their vindictive attempt to proscribe the 
men who had acquiesced in the high-handed pro- 
ceedings of Jeffreys and his colleagues, the changes 
of 1690 must have greatly increased the Whig 
influence in the boroughs. The establishment, in 
1694, of the Bank of England, created a permanent 
stronghold of Whiggism in the heart of the great 
city of London ; for the maintenance of the Bank of 
England was bound up with the existence of the 
National Debt, and few of the fund-holders doubted, 
that one of the first acts of a Jacobite Restoration 
would be to repudiate a liability which had been 
incurred for the express purpose of maintaining 
William on the throne. Finally, to one of the most 
conspicuous of the Whig leaders, Thomas Wharton, 
is attributed the foundation of that elaborate system 
of canvassing, which has, ever since the close of 
the seventeenth century, been one of the most 



THE GREAT WHIG PARTY 389 

conspicuous features of the English poHtical 
system. 

Thus was organised, during the first few years of 
WilHam's reign, that great Whig party which, on the 
death of Anne, assumed control of the destinies of 
England, and held it for half a century. At first 
mainly an organisation for defence, it soon became, 
from the force of circumstances, an active power in 
the conduct of affairs. The foreign ruler who 
succeeded, in 17 14, to the throne of Great Britain, 
found in it the one possibility of safety. The Tories 
who were loyal to the Act of Settlement were unable 
to offer the King any such guarantee; for George, 
though he knew little of English affairs, knew at 
least that they could not hold their Jacobite followers 
down, that they were, in fact, not an organised 
party, but simply a small handful of prudent men 
trying to keep an organised party in check. But the 
Whigs, firm in discipline, and necessarily faithful to a 
settlement which alone saved them from impeach- 
ment as traitors, were safe, if somewhat exacting, 
protectors. An able and active ruler, such as 
William had been, would have used the Whig 
organisation without submitting to it. George I. 
was shrewd enough to see where his safety lay, but 
not sufficiently shrewd or energetic to control the 
situation. The whole responsibility of defending the 
throne against Jacobite plots fell upon the Whig 
leaders ; and to Townshend, and Stanhope, and 
Walpole, it seemed not unfair, that those who took 
the risk should exercise the power. Thus the real 
government of the country passed, in the early )'ears 



390 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

of the seventeenth century, from the hands of the 
Crown into the hands of the Cabinet. It is tolerably 
clear that this arrangement was, for some time, 
looked upon as merely a temporary expedient. We 
have seen, for example, how George II., on his 
accession, tried to break through it. But the speedy 
failure of the attempt revealed the strength which 
the new system had attained, during a few brief years 
of experiment. 

At this point there was a very real danger, that the 
government of England might take the form of a 
permanent bureaucracy. The disintegration of the 
Tory party, the somewhat unscrupulous use of his 
power by Walpole, the pressing fear of a Jacobite 
reaction, which justified, and indeed compelled a 
rigid discipline among the Whigs, tended to convert 
the Cabinet into a close body of officials, recruited 
virtually b}' co-optation, as casual vacancies occurred. 
So long as the Ministers succeeded in preventing the 
King from exercising his power of dismissal, there 
was no authority which could legally alter the com- 
position of the Cabinet ; and it seemed possible, that 
the legal power which the King undoubtedly 
possessed would, in course of time, become a mere 
formality, like the equally legal power of refusing 
assent to Bills passed by both Houses of Parliament. 

But from this possibility England was saved, partly 
by the provisions of existing law, partly by sound 
constitutional traditions, still more by that wholesome 
interest inpublic affairs, and practical genius for politics, 
which have characterised the English race from early 
times. With a recent Triennial Act upon the statute- 



THE POWER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 39 1 

book, it was impossible for the Ministry to stifle Parlia- 
ment, as the States-General had been stifled in France. 
The maxim — " No taxation without representation " 
— forbade any attempt, however indirect, to raise 
money without frequent recurrence to the House of 
Commons ; and it was, happily, quite impossible to 
carry on the government without taxation. Finally, 
the British Parliament in the eighteenth century was 
the last body in the world to allow itself to become 
a mere formality, assembled for the purpose of 
registering Ministerial decrees. 

No sooner, therefore, had the Cabinet established 
its power against the Crown, than it had to face the 
criticism of a Parliament which, having long been 
accustomed to criticise kings, was not in the least 
likely to be bashful in pointing out the faults of 
Ministers. In fact, the critical functions of Parlia- 
ment were now to be exercised with a severity and 
intensity unknown before. For the prominent 
member who, in the early years of the seventeenth 
century, could not help feeling that his activities 
were not unlikely to lead him to the King's Bench 
prison or the pillory, was now replaced by the pro- 
minent member who felt, that if he made himself 
sufficiently formidable, he might reasonably hope to 
gain lucrative office under the Crown. In spite of 
the temporary set-back of the Restoration, Parlia- 
ment, and especially the House of Commons, had 
been steadily growing in power during the whole of 
the seventeenth century, and now felt itself to be the 
ultimate arbiter of the nation's destinies. 

But the situation was somewhat peculiar ; or, at 



392 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

least, it was novel. For, as we have seen, just a few 
years before the accession of the Hanoverian dynasty, 
an important change in the law had excluded all 
members of the House of Commons, with a few 
important exceptions, from the holding of public 
office ; or rather, had prevented the creation of new 
offices for the benefit of members of the Commons' 
House. Thus a very natural and obvious means of 
securing harmony between the Cabinet and the 
representatives of the people was seriously cir- 
cumscribed. And the same feeling which had 
prompted the change for some time continued to 
hamper the growth of the new system. No one can 
read the debates which took place during the early 
years of the eighteenth century, without realising, 
that the more independent members of the House of 
Commons regarded the holder of office as, pi-imd 
facie, a suspicious person. The feeling was partly 
due to the traditions of hostility between Crown and 
Parliament which had survived from the Civil War, 
partly, it is to be feared, to the more recent memories 
of the Restoration period. It was necessary, if the 
Ministry was to secure the confidence of the nation, 
that it should be supported in Parliament by men 
who were not ostensibly biassed in their views by the 
possession of office. Had parties been at all evenly 
balanced, it would, no doubt, have been possible to 
appeal, with some confidence, to party principles. 
But it must again be remembered that the Tories, 
though unquestionably a numerous body, were 
regarded, during the reigns of George I. and 
George H., as outside the pale of practical politics. 



THE POLICY OF BRIBERY 393 

Until the taint of Jacobitism had been finally purged 
from their ranks, all those sober citizens who looked 
upon the return of the Stuarts as the worst of all 
possible calamities, steadily supported the Whigs, 
and were inclined to wink very hard at any methods, 
however objectionable, which secured them in office. 
This fact is the one justification for the plan which, 
despite all attempts at whitewashing, must un- 
doubtedly be regarded as the deliberate policy of 
Walpole and his colleagues. Walpole felt that, 
though the great majority of the House of Commons, 
who called themselves Whigs, could always be relied 
upon to vote straight when the question was one 
which really menaced the safety of the throne, they 
could not be trusted, on motives of pure patriotism, 
not to attempt combinations with a view of seizing 
office for themselves. We are not called upon to 
decide the delicate question whether, in resorting to 
doubtful means to defeat this tendency, Walpole 
thought more of the danger to the country or of the 
danger to his own ascendency. In all probability, 
most successful politicians feel that the prosperity of 
the country is intimately bound up with their own 
retention in office. And this at least may be said, 
that Walpole had more excuse than most Ministers 
for such a thought. At any rate, it is not impossible, 
not even improbable, that a successful revolt in the 
Ministerial ranks would have given the Jacobites that 
opportunity for which, until the disastrous failure of 
the Young Pretender in 1745, they never ceased to 
watch. And so Walpole set himself, by an organised 
system of bribery, to beat down opposition within his 



394 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

own party, and to secure a docile majority in the 
House of Commons. Perhaps if he had trusted his 
party a Httle more, if he had admitted a few of the 
aspiring young Whigs in the House to office, if he 
had been less jealous of his personal supremacy, he 
might have avoided his disastrous defeat in 1742 ; 
certainly he would have left politics in a more whole- 
some condition. But Walpole, with all his talents, 
was an opportunist. He was not trying to found a 
new system of Government ; he was merely con- 
tending with the difficulties of the moment. 

Nevertheless, as has been shown in a previous 
chapter, he did undoubtedly contribute a large share 
towards the establishment of a new system. The 
independence of the Cabinet in its relations with the 
Crown, the necessity for at least outward unity among 
Ministers, the dependence of the Cabinet on the good 
will of the House of Commons, the importance of 
finance as the centre of practical politics — all these 
features of the Cabinet system were clearly brought 
out during his tenure of office. The one unsatis- 
factory element in that system, as he left it, was the 
organisation of the House of Commons, which, instead 
of being clearly divided into two great parties, repre- 
senting broad differences of principle, was now broken 
up into sections, each striving to snatch the sweets of 
office from the hands of its rivals, and only kept in 
hand by the use of doubtful means. 

The natural result is to be seen in the long and 
unsatisfactory period of politics marked by the Peace of 
Aix-la-Chapelle and the capitulation of Klosterseven, 
by the practical dictatorship of Newcastle, and, just 



THE TORY PARTY 395 

as things appeared to be improving, by the stubborn 
and partly successful attempt of George II. to destroy 
the new system. Had not the Whigs, confident in 
their numerical superiority, and divided by personal 
jealousies, been accustomed to rely more on pocket- 
boroughs than on principles, many of the disasters 
which marked the latter years of George II. would 
have been avoided. Still more, had the Whigs been 
a united party, the brilliant Ministry of the elder Pitt 
would never have succumbed to the intrigues of Bute 
and Henry Fox. Finally, had the Tories, now returned 
to politics, been taught to regard the fall of the Whigs 
as the natural prelude to their own admission to 
office, it is hardly possible that they would, despite 
their loyalty to the throne, have cast themselves 
abjectly at the feet of the youthful monarch ; nor 
would that monarch, but for the precedents of Walpole 
and Newcastle, have ventured upon a career of shame- 
less corruption which far outstripped the moderate 
lapses of Walpole, and even exceeded the venalities 
of the Restoration. 

But, though the immediate result of the reap- 
pearance of the Tory party was unfavourable to the 
new system, it ultimately proved to be the element 
necessary to its completion. For the true represen- 
tatives of the new Tory party were, not the slavish 
recipients of bribes who followed North, but the men 
who crowded to Parliament, after the elections of 
1784, to support the youthful Pitt. And it was he 
who, by his bold appeal to the constituencies against 
the verdict of a factious House, added the final 
principle to the new system, and established the great 



396 HISTORY AND CRITICISM ^ 

doctrine, that the supreme arbitrament of politics 
belongs, neither to the Crown, nor to the Cabinet, nor 
to Parliament, but to the constituencies. It is this 
fact which, perhaps more than any other, explains 
the bitterness of the Coalition in 1784. The sup- 
porters of Fox and North, nursed in the evil traditions 
of Parliamentary corruption, regarded with dismay 
the prospect of a step which would destroy the 
supremacy of the House of Commons, and, as a 
natural consequence, render it less imperative for the 
Ministry of the day to conciliate the existing members. 
Hence, Pitt's action in 1784 was not merely a new 
development of the Cabinet System ; it was really a 
powerful blow struck in the cause of Reform. The 
more evident it became that the constituencies were 
now a working force in politics, the more inevitable 
it became that the constituencies should be widened. 
It might, with some shadow of plausibility, be urged 
that, so long as the government of England was, 
avowedly, not popular, but Parliamentary, it was in 
accordance with the fitness of things that the House of 
Commons should be chosen by the privileged classes 
in the country. But, when the appeal to public 
opinion was admitted as a normal principle of govern- 
ment, it became absurd to urge that public opinion 
was fairly represented by the accidental anomalies of 
decayed boroughs, or even by the faggot votes of the 
counties. Thus the Reform Act itself, though it, 
doubtless, made great changes in the policy of the 
State, made little change in the machinery of the 
Cabinet System. For its principles had already been 
anticipated by the momentous precedent of 1784. 



EVOLUTION OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 397 

In concluding this brief summary of the evolution 
of the Cabinet System, it may be permissible to point 
out one fact, which can hardly have escaped the 
notice of the reader, but which will, nevertheless, bear 
mention. This is, the extraordinarily unconscious 
character of the whole process which has resulted in the 
establishment of the system. Each step has been the 
consequence, not of any matured scheme for the reform 
of the Constitution, but of the practical exigencies of 
a particular situation. It is not merely that the actual 
Law of the Constitution stands on no different foot- 
ing from that occupied by any other part of our legal 
system, that there are no more stringent legal 
guarantees against infringement of the most cardinal 
principle of that Constitution than those which pro- 
tect and enforce the least important rule of private 
law. That fact is striking enough ; and it is a serious 
stumbling block to those who approach the study of 
the Constitution from the outside. But the really vital 
fact is, that many of the most important rules which 
govern the practical working of our political system 
are not, in the strict sense. Law at all, but merely 
conventions which are observed, without legal com- 
pulsion, by those engaged in the administration of 
affairs. If we except the Act which limits the dura- 
tion of Parliament to seven years, and the various 
Place Acts, which exclude officials of the Crown from 
the House of Commons, it is hard to recall any single 
principle of the Cabinet system which is embodied, 
even indirectly, in an Act of Parliament. A student 
of tireless industry might wade through the long 
series of volumes in which our statute law is con- 



398 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

tained, without gleaning the most distant hint of its 
existence. 

Nor is it recognised by that important part of 
our legal system which depends for its validity 
upon the decisions of the Law Courts. A lawyer 
who had all these decisions at his fingers' 
ends might be in complete ignorance of its most 
important features. It has been mentioned that 
Blackstone, the classical exponent of English law 
at the end of the eighteenth century, passes it over 
in complete silence. And though, as has also been 
suggested, Blackstone may have had special reasons 
for his attitude, no such suggestion can apply to 
acute foreign critics, such as Montesquieu and 
Delolme, who studied the working of government 
in England in the second and third quarters of the 
eighteenth century. And yet Montesquieu finds the 
secret of the British Constitution in the fact, that the 
legislative and the executive authorities are lodged 
in absolutely independent hands ; while Delolme 
announces, with an air of profound wisdom, that 
the immediate cause of English liberty is " the 
having placed all the Executive authority in the 
State out of the hands of those in whom the people 
trust." But perhaps the most striking testimony to 
the impalpable qualities of the system is to be 
found in the fact that, so late as the middle of 
the nineteenth century, when the statesmen of the 
great colonies of Australia — men of exceptional 
ability, steeped in English traditions — tried to re- 
produce it in their own Constitution Statutes, they 
were baffled and ultimately beaten by the difficulties 



POLITICS IN SOLUTION 399 

of the task. It was their unanimous wish to make 
the Cabinet System the express law of their colonies. 
They found it impossible to do so, and had to be 
content with the humbler task of striving to avoid 
inserting, in the written law, any provisions which 
might actually conflict with the working of that 
elusive and impalpable scheme which they were 
fully determined to introduce. It is possible to 
go even a step further, and to doubt whether the 
Cabinet system is capable of being described, in a 
complete and thorough way, even in a treatise which 
does not suffer from the limitations of an Act of 
Parliament. At any rate, there does not appear to 
be any such complete exposition in existence. 
Burke's famous pamphlet is a defence rather than 
a description ; Macaulay's eloquent work is a his- 
tory of the early stages of a process which was but 
just beginning at the time at which his work ends ; 
Bagehot's masterly essays are suggestive and inspir- 
ing sketches rather than a complete picture. Perhaps 
Mr. Leonard Courtney's recent book. The Working 
Constitution of the United Kingdom, is the most 
thorough and systematic attempt to depict the system 
in its entirety ; but it is too soon yet to say whether 
his work will be accepted as a classic.^ For the real 
truth seems to be, that the Cabinet system is rather a 
means of disguising the machinery of government, 
than the machinery of government itself. It is 
politics in solution. 

' The writer ventures to suggest, with all the deference due to an 
author of Mr. Courtney's great political experience, that the House of 
Commons plays too large a part, and the Cabinet too small a part, in 
his picture. 



400 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

11. 

If, however, abandoning the almost hopeless effort 
to dogmatise about the structure of the Cabinet 
System, we turn to consider a few of the important 
results which its introduction has produced, we are 
not met by any insuperable difficulty. 

In the first place we may say, without much fear of 
contradiction, that one most striking result has been, 
the increase in the popularity and prestige of the 
Crown. The English character is a curious com- 
pound of deference and criticism. It clings with 
desperate tenacity to institutions which, in appear- 
ance at least, have ceased to have any practical 
force. But it is as far as possible from accepting 
meekly the guidance of actual authority. In other 
words, it does not speculate about the ideal fitness 
of institutions which cause it no practical incon- 
venience ; but it is apt to question very sharply the 
title of people who interfere with its wishes, as all 
actual rulers of the people must inevitably do. 
There is a happy story of a native Minister in an 
Oriental state which was very much under the 
" influence " of an European Power. The question 
was as to the appointment of a subordinate official. 

The native Minister wished to appoint A ; the 

European Power was determined that B should 

be appointed. The representative of European in- 
fluence, anxious to soften the harshness of the 
situation, endeavoured to persuade the native 

Minister that B was really the better man for 

the post — to make B 's appointment, in fact, the 



THE ENGLISH ATTITUDE IN POLITICS 4OI 

ostensible act of the native Minister. But he found 
his opponent inflexible. Upon an abstract question 
of that kind no concession was possible ; and the 
argument threatened to become endless. At last 
the representative of European influence was obliged 
to hint, that his Government was determined to have 
its own way. Whereupon, with true Oriental phlegm, 
the defeated Minister remarked, — " If it is an order, I 
have nothing more to say." The practical result of 
the struggle seemed to him of no importance com- 
pared with the abstract merits of the case. That is 
just the precise opposite of the English attitude in 
politics. Charles I. lost his head, not because he was 
a bad man, but because he would interfere with the 
working of politics in a way which annoyed the 
average Englishman. Charles II., whose notion of 
the prerogative was probably quite as high as that 
of his father, and whose character was infinitely worse, 
was usually popular with the nation, because he did 
not actively thwart its wishes. James II. might have 
professed Catholicism to the end of his life, if he had 
not insisted on disturbing vested interests. George I. 
and George II., despite the want of attractiveness in 
their persons and characters, and despite the dis- 
advantage of their foreign birth, were not seriously 
unpopular, because, and mainly because, they had 
the good sense to abstain from the active conduct 
of internal politics. George III., despite the com- 
parative advantages of his birth and education, and 
the enthusiasm with which his accession was wel- 
comed, soon lost his popularity, because he became 
involved in the turmoil of practical politics. He 

27 



402 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

regained it when age and disease had compelled 
him to withdraw from the real conduct of affairs. 
It would have been useless for an English republi- 
can of the year 1810 to point out to an audience of 
average Englishmen, that the ostensible conduct of 
affairs of State was in the hands of a man suffering 
from senile decay. They would have said — " Poor 
old man ! But he does what his Ministers tell him." 
George IV. came near to losing his crown by his 
action with respect to the Queen ; in other words, 
by following his own personal views. But he became 
quite popular, despite his worthless character, when 
he placed himself in the hands of his advisers. 
There can be little doubt that William IV., not- 
withstanding his earlier liberal sympathies, would 
have blocked the passage of the Reform Bill if he 
had dared ; but he bowed before the advice of his 
Ministers, and saved his popularity, perhaps his 
throne. It is now known that the perfect attitude 
of Queen Victoria on political questions was not 
reached without an inward struggle, of which the 
famous " Bedchamber Question " was the only 
evidence which the public of the day was permitted 
to see. But the results of the victory became every 
year more apparent in the increasing popularity of 
the Crown, till they culminated in a position so 
enviable, so unique, that it seemed almost beyond 
the possibilities of humanity. Strange political 
suggestions are continually mooted, but it is surely 
permissible to wonder whether any more rash pro- 
posal hds ever been made than that which occa- 
sionally crops up, to the effect that the monarch 



THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE 403 

should take a more direct— that is, a more avowed 
—share in British poHtics. To reahse the full mean- 
ing of this proposal, we have only to think of what 
would have been the result if Queen Victoria had 
been believed to be personally responsible for the 
prosecution of Mr. Bradlaugh, or for the introduc- 
tion of the Home Rule Bill, in the sense in which 
George III. was known to be personally responsible 
for the prosecution of Wilkes, and for the introduc- 
tion of the American Stamp Act. It has been before 
remarked, that there has now ceased to be a party 
in the State specially devoted to the defence of the 
royal prerogative. But that is simply because there 
has long ceased to be any party which desires to 
limit the prerogative. It is absurd to defend that 
which nobody dreams of attacking. In the year 
1780 Dunning carried, in the House of Commons, 
a motion to the effect that "the power of the 
Crown has increased, is increasing, and ought to 
be diminished." Such a motion, in such a place, 
would not only have now no chance of success ; it 
would be absurd and meaningless. It would be as 
if a man called upon the public to observe, that the 
way in which he conducted his own business was 
wrong. 

It is hardly possible to exaggerate the importance 
of this result of the Cabinet System. For if it is a 
good thing that the Crown should be popular in 
Great Britain, it is absolutely essential, if the unity 
of the Empire is to be preserved, that the Crown 
should be popular in the Greater Britain beyond the 
seas. The Englishman whose sentiments and tradi- 



404 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

tions are coloured by the memories of struggles in 
which the Parliament at Westminster has played a 
leading part, is apt to forget that those memories 
and associations appeal but faintly to the millions of 
his fellow-subjects in Asia, Africa, America, and 
Australasia. A personal acquaintance with the trend 
of colonial thought is apt to startle the home-bred 
islander. He finds that the sovereignty of that 
Parliament which he has been accustomed to look 
upon with veneration, as the parent of his liberties, is 
regarded with much less enthusiasm by the citizen of 
Melbourne or Quebec. The latter is, in fact, inclined 
to treat the sovereignty of the British Parliament as 
an ingenious device for imposing the prejudices of 
the mother country upon her children, rather than as 
a bulwark of his liberties. F'or the realisation of his 
own strong ideals he looks, not to the Parliament at 
Westminster, but to his own Parliament ; and he is 
apt to resent very strongly any claim of superiority 
on behalf of the older institution. And it is difficult 
to allege that his criticism is unfounded. The average 
level of political intelligence is at least as high in 
Australia and in Canada as it is in the United 
Kingdom ; while, in the knowledge of local facts, the 
Colonial Parliament has an unquestioned advantage. 
But no such divided allegiance distracts the reverence 
of the same man for the Crown. There is but one 
King in all the British Empire ; there are many 
Parliaments. King Edward is his King ; in a sense 
in which the British Parliament is not his Parliament. 
Every act of State, down to the delivery of a half- 
penny post-card, is done, in his colony, no less than in 



POPULARITY OF THE CROWN 405 

Great Britain, in the name of the Crown, or, at least, 
in the name of a Governor who is, avowedly, the 
servant of the Crown. His Ministers are the 
Ministers of the Crown ; and, as such, entitled to act 
without reference to the Parliament at Westminster. 
If you point out to him that a statute of the Imperial 
Parliament could, according to legal theory, reverse 
the most cherished doctrine of his political faith — 
for example, introduce Free Trade in the place of 
Protection — he will warn you grimly, that it is 
dangerous to talk in that way, if you value the unity 
of the Empire. So far as institutions are a bond, it 
is, in fact, the popularity of the Crown, and not the 
popularity of the British Parliament, which holds the 
Empire together ; and it is the legal position of the 
Crown, as the supreme organ of political activity, 
which enables the Empire to speak with a single 
voice. Doubtless the sentiment of brotherhood is 
the life-blood of the political organism. But an 
organism, to be successful in the struggle for 
existence, needs a head as well as a heart.^ 

It is natural, at this point, to meet an objection 
which is sometimes levelled, by the critics of the 
Cabinet System, at the present position of the Crown. 
What, say these critics, is the use of exalting the 
dignity of the monarch, if you deprive him of real 

^ An extreme hypothesis may be put as a test of the view expressed 
above, regarding the relative importance of Crown and Parliament in 
imperial affairs. Suppose that an unforeseen series of calamities were 
to render it necessary for the nation to provide against a failure of 
succession to the throne. Would the choice again be left to the unfettered 
discretion of the two Houses of the British Parliament, as it was in 1688, 
or in 1 700 ? 



406 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

power ? To which it might very well be answered, 
that the mere fact that the Crown is the symbol of 
unity, is of priceless value to the stability of the 
political structure. No sane student of politics 
doubts the influence of sentiment in the affairs of 
State ; and, when a widespread sentiment makes for 
unity and reverence, it is almost impossible to over- 
rate its importance. But there is no need to resort 
to this plea in abatement. We should rather 
challenge the objectors to prove their assertion, that 
the Cabinet System deprives the monarch of real 
power. No doubt it deprives him of ostensible power ; 
but that is a very different thing. It is, of course, 
difficult for any one who has never taken part in the 
inner working of practical politics, to speak with any 
degree of confidence about such a delicate mystery as 
the secret relations between Crown and Cabinet. 
But from time to time facts leak out which seem to 
show, that the occupant of the British throne is very 
far from being that mere figure-head which super- 
ficial writers and speakers have imagined. Much 
probably depends, as it surely should do, on the 
personal character and experience of the monarch. 
It would hardly, for example, be hazardous to guess 
that, at least during the latter half of her illustrious 
reign, the influence of Queen Victoria upon practical 
politics was very great. Nor is there anything in the 
theory of the Cabinet System which makes such an 
influence in the slightest degree unconstitutional. 
The virtue of the Cabinet System is, that, while it 
gives the nation the full benefit of the wisdom of a 
great and good monarch, it limits the power for harm 



VIRTUE OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 407 

of a bad or incapable monarch. And, inasmuch as, 
with an hereditary monarchy, there cannot possibly 
be any guarantee that the actual occupant of the 
throne will be either great or good, this feature of the 
Cabinet System must be regarded as one of its 
chiefest virtues. For, while it is not possible, if the 
rule of heredity is strictly observed, to guarantee a 
succession of great monarchs, it is possible, by careful 
training, to be reasonably secure, that the heir to the 
throne shall be brought up to realise and perform the 
not very difficult duties which his future position will 
imperatively require of him. In other words, the 
Cabinet System demands little of a monarch who has 
little to give ; while it is capable of receiving much 
from a monarch who has much to bestow. And if it 
does, to some extent, conceal the merits of a really 
great ruler, it acts as a merciful screen to the follies 
or the weaknesses of a bad one. It is, just precisely 
on this account, the most suitable complement of an 
hereditary monarchy, in which the personal character 
of the monarch is largely a matter of accident. 

A second and equally striking result of the intro- 
duction of the Cabinet System, is the unity which it 
has given, not only to the different parts of the 
Empire, but to the political organs of the mother 
country itself It was just precisely this point which 
was missed by Montesquieu and Delolme, and which 
was brought out by Bagehot, with his usual felicity, in 
his famous comparison of the Cabinet to a hyphen, 
which links together Crown and Parliament. The 
dangers of a divided authority had been seen in a 
lurid light in the evils of the Civil War — a war which 



408 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

was really inevitable, because by the old Constitution 
neither the Crown nor the Parlian:ient was supreme, 
and because each was unwilling to admit the super- 
iority of the other. Similar difficulties have occurred 
in the ancient world, as in the case of the Roman 
Republic ; in the Middle Ages, as in the Republic of 
Venice and the Holy Roman Empire ; and in modern 
times, as in the history of the United States of 
America. After the Restoration, the government of 
England was, for more than half a century, in a 
condition of unstable equilibrium. Two changes of 
dynasty did not solve the difficulty. James II. and 
his Parliaments could not agree ; William of Orange 
more than once threatened to return to Holland ; 
and George I. uttered similar threats. But never, 
since the days of George I., has there been a quarrel 
between Parliament and the Crown, save for the few 
brief months at the beginning of 1784 ; and on that 
occasion the new system soon found a complete 
remedy. Even the boasted independence of the Law 
Courts is not proof against the unifying influence of the 
Cabinet ; for any quarrel between them and the* other 
organs of State can be promptly extinguished by 
egislation introduced by the Government of the day, 
as was proved by the result of the Hansard libel case 
in 1840.^ It is not, however, only between the great 
branches of State authority that quarrels may occur. 

' The Court of Queen's Bench held Messrs. Hansard, the Parha- 
mentary printers, responsible for libellous statements contained in a 
report published by order of the House of Commons. An Act was 
passed providing that such publications should, for the future, be 
privileged from liability. 



POWER OF THE CAB/ NET 4O9 

It has already been pointed out, that one of the real 
possibilities of the Revolution was the establishment 
of a dominating bureaucracy ; and, if that had resulted, 
the opportunities of friction between rival offices 
would have been endless. Even now, with the pre- 
sent very moderate system of official machinery, it is 
occasionally whispered that there are differences of 
opinion between departments of the permanent ser- 
vices. But the great influence of the Cabinet is 
brought to bear upon any such germs of dissension 
before they have time to develope into serious dangers. 
For the members of the Cabinet care very little about 
details of administration, and are not likely to 
champion very ardently the quarrels of their sub- 
ordinates ; while they care a great deal that the 
wheels of the State machinery should appear to run 
smoothly, for any obstruction or disorder would dis- 
credit their reputation. 

But the unifying influence of the Cabinet is not 
confined to composing quarrels between the different 
organs of State. It really wields, at least in secular 
affairs, that immense and comprehensive force which 
lawyers call the Sovereignty of the State, because 
(with the important reservation to be hereafter 
mentioned) it can make that force, which has no legal 
limits, take any direction which it pleases. If it 
cannot do so, it ceases to be a Cabinet, and has to 
resign. Of course its power, like all human power, is 
limited by human possibilities ; but there are no other 
limitations. And, be it observed, the Cabinet acts 
without formality, without publicity, without fixed 
rules of procedure. A few gentlemen meet together 



410 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

occasionally in a room in Downing Street, and decide 
the fate of that immense and complicated organism 
known as the British Empire, with its hundreds of 
millions of inhabitants. No doubt some of its deci- 
sions require the sanction of subsequent Acts of 
Parliament ; but if the Cabinet really represents, as 
it is supposed to do, the majority in Parliament, 
those Acts follow as a matter of course. No doubt 
its policy may be thwarted by appeals to the Law 
Courts ; but, if necessary, the Law Courts also can 
be brought into harmony by Acts of Parliament. In 
theory also, and perhaps (if the crisis w^ere urgent 
enough) in fact, by the same means the Cabinet could 
overrule the opposition of the Church — for example, 
if it resolved that a portion of the annual sum pay- 
able for tithes in England should be appropriated to 
the needs of the State. No doubt the Cabinet acts 
at its peril ; its authority is moral only, not physical. 
But the great merit of the Cabinet is that, in a 
moment of supreme national crisis, it could, if its 
members had sufficient nerve, call into active exercise 
the whole of the vast slumbering energies of the 
Empire — could, for example, levy five million men, 
and impose an income tax of fifteen shillings in the 
pound throughout the dominions of the Crown. It 
could do this, and do it with extraordinary swiftness, 
if — and only if — it had the united opinion of the 
Empire behind it ; for, whilst its- power to giwQ effect 
to public opinion is immense, its power to thwart 
public opinion is comparatively small. This is 
perhaps the highest praise that can be awarded, by 
those who believe in the vox pofuli, to any organ of 



THE HOUSE OF LORDS 4I I 

Government ; and it is perhaps to the Cabinet 
System, as much as to the sovereign power of Parlia- 
ment, that we owe what Mr. Bryce has so happily 
termed the " flexibility " of our Constitution. 

To this striking feature of the Cabinet System 
there is but one serious qualification. This is, it 
need hardly be said, the position of the House of 
Lords. The apologists of that venerable body, 
anxious to find a justification for its existence, have 
imagined for it a serene impartiality which greatly 
moderates the strife of contending parties, and pre- 
serves the nation from the ill-effects of hasty legisla- 
tion. It has a right, they say, to correct the judg- 
ment of the House of Commons by the judgment of 
the constituencies. Such a position is not without 
its value ; certainly condemnation of the House of 
Lords is not condemnation of the bicameral system. 
But every one knows that the House of Lords is not 
an impartial body ; it is notoriousl}/ partisan, and has 
been for a century past. Practically speaking, it 
never suspends the judgment of the House of 
Commons when a Tory government is in power. 
It risked a revolution in 1832, and threatened to do 
so again in 1884, because the Reform Bills of those 
years were introduced by Liberal Cabinets. But it 
swallowed the Reform Bill of 1867 with scarcely 
a murmur, because it was introduced by a Tory 
Ministry. In short, the House of Lords is useless 
as a Court of Appeal ; for it is always known before- 
hand what its judgment will be. 

The unsatisfactory character of the House of 
Lords has been long admitted, by all but those 



412 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

extreme partisans, who believe that the Tory party 
is invariably right, and its opponents invariably 
wrong. And suggestions have from time to time 
been made, with a view of bringing the Upper House 
into harmony with the principles upon which Cabinet 
government is based. One of these is the adoption 
of the rule, that if, upon a dissolution provoked by 
the refusal of the House of Lords to carry a measure 
passed by the Commons, the elections should con- 
firm the judgment of the Lower House, the Lords 
should then give way. It is no objection to this 
suggestion, that it proposes to depend upon a rule 
of custom rather than a rule of law. Many of the 
essential rules of our Constitution are, as we have 
seen, similarly circumstanced. But it is a strong 
objection, that the liberty thus by implication allowed 
to the House of Lords might cause disastrous delay 
in the working of politics, and nullify what, as we 
have urged, is one of the chief virtues of the Cabinet 
System. It is not impossible to imagine a crisis in 
which the clear judgment of the Cabinet, backed by 
the overwhelming majority of the House of Commons, 
was in favour of a particular course. Let us suppose, 
for example, a situation so grave that, in the judg- 
ment of the Cabinet, it could only be met by the 
immediate grant of self-government to a colony 
which had not hitherto enjoyed it, or the immediate 
withdrawal of self-government from a colony to 
which it had previously been granted. Such a step 
would necessitate the passing of an Act of Parlia- 
ment. The delay caused by an appeal to the con- 
stituencies might rob the measure of its entire merit 



THE SPIRIT OF LENIENCY 413 

as the solution of a critical situation. And yet, 
according to this doctrine, the House of Lords would 
be well within its province in demanding such an 
appeal. The House of Lords might conceivably, in 
such a case, be right. But it is entirely at variance 
with the spirit of the Cabinet System, that the House 
of Lords should be the final arbiter in such a matter. 
It would seem that the older remedy for the difficulty, 
a remedy which was actually practised on a small 
scale in 171 2, and which was threatened in 1832, is 
far more efficacious and less dangerous. In such a 
crisis, the power of creating new peers ought to be 
used freely and promptly. In all probability the 
mere threat would be enough, as it was in 1832. 
But, even if it were not, there would seem to be 
little harm in carrying it into execution. A numerous 
House of Lords is no more dangerous, politically, 
than a small House of Lords. The only harm 
involved would be to the exclusive privileges of the 
existing peers ; and for this they would have them- 
selves to thank. Vested interests cannot be allowed 
to stand in the way of national safety. 

A third very marked accompaniment, if not a 
result, of the Cabinet System, is the spirit of leniency 
which has come over politics in the last century and 
a half Under the old system, the monarch, very 
naturally, resented any criticism upon his Ministers 
as a personal attack upon himself This fact at once 
rendered the whole situation tragic. The Opposition 
(if we may be guilty of a slight anachronism) hesi- 
tated to apply temperate criticism, when they knew 
that it might bring down upon them the personal 



414 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

resentment of the Crown, and when they felt that 
they had no means of making their criticism effective. 
It is the great honour of Elizabeth that, at least on 
some occasions, she rose superior to natural tendencies. 
But her successors were less wise. As a consequence, 
the Minister and his critics fought with buttonless 
foils. If the Minister was successful, his opponents 
went to prison or the pillory. If the Opposition won, 
the Minister went to the block, or saved himself by 
flight. Buckingham, it is true, anticipated his fate, 
by falling a victim to the dagger of Felton. But 
Strafford and Laud paid for the failure of their 
policy with their heads ; Danby and Oxford were 
imprisoned in the Tower and had to stand trial for 
their lives ; while Finch, Windebank, Clarendon, 
Sunderland and Bolingbroke, sought safety in flight. 
Walpole, in this, as in so many other matters, was 
the first of a new order. When he fell in 1742, his 
enemies, following established precedent, talked 
loudly of impeachment. But it soon occurred to 
them that it was idle to slay a dead foe. What 
they wanted were his offices and power ; and those 
they had secured. Why insist on the blood of a 
man who no longer stood in their way ? And thus 
began that reign of tolerance in politics which permits 
the warmest friendship between men who thunder 
nightly at one another across the floor of the House 
of Commons, and which finds its extreme expression 
in the practice of conferring titles and dignities upon 
men who have just been declared, by the solemn 
voice of the representatives of the nation, to be 
unworthy of the confidence of the Crown. It is, of 



MEN AND MEASURES 415 

course, an obvious criticism on this striking change, 
that leniency towards poHtical errors may lead to 
carelessness on the one side and to captious criticism 
on the other. But there are better safeguards against 
neglect of duty than the fear of cruel punishment. 
A Minister now knows that one defeat does not mean 
an end to his career. If his conduct has really been 
justifiable, he will have future opportunities of justify- 
ing it. If he is too old to look for a return to office, 
he will have younger colleagues who will do their 
best to prevent him discrediting them. A member 
of the Opposition knows, too, if he is a wise man, 
that nothing so surely tends to exclude him from the 
prospects of office, as captious and groundless critic- 
ism, even of his opponents. After all, there is a 
great difference between an error of judgment and 
a crime ; and the fact that the one is no longer 
punished as the other, makes it all the more easy tc 
apply to the error of judgment the penalty really 
suitable to the case. 

Finally, it is one of the most important questions 
that can be asked of any system of government — 
what sort of men and what sort of measures does 
it bring to the service of the country ? For it matters 
little that a Constitution is the most perfect piece of 
political machinery that philosophy can devise, if it is, 
de facto^ in the hands of incapable or inferior agents, 
and does, de facto, produce bad measures. This is 
evidently not a question that can be answered off- 
hand. We must proceed by cautious observation. 

The chief State officials under the old system fell, 
roughly, into one of two classes. Either they were 



41 6 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

great noblemen, whose support was essential to the 
safety of the Government, or they were men whom 
the Crown had raised from humble positions, because 
of their industry, their capacity, their suppleness, and 
their devotion to its interests. In the Middle Ages 
a Privy Council was, as a rule, about equally divided 
between these two classes. When a strong king was 
on the throne, the latter showed a tendency to pre- 
dominate, because the Crown felt itself able to do 
without the support of magnates whose independence 
was a standing source of irritation. But when, as in 
the days of Richard II. and Henry VI., the monarch 
was weak, the Council Chamber was filled with great 
nobles — men like John of Gaunt, Gloucester, War- 
wick, Arundel, Bedford, York, and Somerset — whose 
quarrels continually disturbed the peace of the realm. 
It was, however, the special good fortune of England 
that a third class of Ministers, men chosen simply 
for their social charm, though well known on the 
Continent, never made good their position here. As 
soon as they appeared, they were ruthlessly swept 
aside by the sterner elements in politics. 

The accession of the Tudor dynasty marked a 
decided leaning towards the second class of Crown 
officials. The aristocratic names disappear from the 
records of the State, and are replaced by those of 
men like Dudley, Wolsey, Thomas Cromwell, Cecil, 
Walsingham, and Thomas Smith, some of whom 
founded great families, but who were very humble 
persons when first admitted to the royal favour. 
That the change v/as fully realised, at least by some 
people, is proved by the language of the rebels in the 



MINISTERIAL TYPES 41/ 

Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536. One of the claims of 
the discontented faction was " the taking away of the 
base blood from the Council." In spite of a dangerous 
leaning towards personal favourites,^ the Stuarts 
followed, on the whole, the example of the Tudors ; 
and it is again one of the thoughts which so con- 
stantly compel us to regard the Civil War as a great 
turning-point in history, that if Charles could only 
have been brought to accept Eliot or Pym as his 
Minister, the Civil War need never have been fought. 
But it was too soon yet to argue that successful 
Parliamentary Opposition gave a claim to office. 
Strafford preferred to be a Minister of the old type 
and lost his head in consequence. 

We have seen, already, how it was that the Minister 
whose chief qualification was devotion to the personal 
interests of the Crown, was gradually replaced by the 
type of Minister who owes his position mainly to 
other influences ; and there is no need to tell the 
story again. The question rather is — what sort of 
Minister have these new influences produced ? 

It is great testimony to the power of Burke's pene- 
tration, that, more than a century and a quarter after 
his famous pamphlet was written, we are still com- 
pelled to admit that there can hardly be any better 
definition of the sources of political power than those 
which he gives. A politician who succeeds in reaching 
high office generally owes his success to one of two 
causes, connection or popularity, or, it may be, to a 

^ The Duke of Buckingham, who was assassinated in 1628, is 
perhaps the most glaring, because the most successful, example of 
the royal " favourite " in English politics. 

28 



41 8 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

combination of both. These two sources, so different 
in their character, faithfully reflect that dual spirit 
in British institutions, which is at once so puzzling 
and so attractive to competent foreign observers. 
On the one hand, it would be possible to argue with 
great force that no system of government in the world, 
not even that of the Swiss Republic, is so democratic 
as the British. On the other, it is easy to point out, 
by reference to numerous examples, that intensely 
conservative and exclusive element in our system 
which has preserved, even under modern conditions, 
an almost unbroken current of political tradition for 
upwards of two hundred years. The introduction of 
the Cabinet System did not create these elements ; 
but it altered the conditions under which they worked. 
And it is in that respect that its interest, for our 
immediate purpose, lies. 

In old days an aristocracy which felt itself slighted 
indulged in dangerous intrigues and plots. A people 
which felt itself plundered and oppressed broke out 
into insurrection or obstruction. Under present con- 
ditions, if the privileged classes feel that things are, 
from their point of view, going badly, a few of the 
more influential and able among them pass the word 
along that electric current which vibrates so power- 
fully throughout a highly organised society. The 
aristocratic institutions of the country, the peerage, 
the Church, the older universities, the great public 
schools, the army, the bar, the wealthy clubs, become, 
almost unconsciously, centres of propagandism. Bar- 
gains are made, half unconsciously, to secure their 
support. The enormous social influence at their 



FLEXIBILITY OF THE SYSTEM 419 

disposal is used for spreading among the lower ranks 
in the social hierarchy doctrines which inculcate 
respect for the ancient order. Harshness towards 
inferiors is tacitly forbidden, as likely to produce 
unpopularity. Dallying with dangerous ideas, some- 
times a favourite relaxation with aristocrats, is sternly 
discouraged, and labelled as bad form. On the other 
hand, orthodox brilliancy, if it shows itself in the 
ranks of the upper classes, is loudly applauded ; for 
a reputation for intellect, though it perhaps counts 
for less in the British Empire than anywhere else in 
the world, has its value. Systematic efforts are made 
to win over powerful opponents from the opposite 
camp. Literature and science are pressed into the 
cause. Sometimes accidental circumstances, such as 
a long run of commercial prosperity or a great war, 
are powerful adjuncts ; for men who are making 
fortunes rapidly are unlikely to attack privileges 
which they hope soon to share, and in a great war 
the undoubted virtues of a good aristocracy come 
out well, if some of its defects are likewise some- 
what conspicuous. Gradually the vane of public 
opinion swings round. Then it is that the wonderful 
flexibility of the Cabinet System appears. That 
system requires, in effect, that every Minister shall be 
a member of one or other House of Parliament ; and 
it was at one time thought, that the Reform Acts of 
the nineteenth century had put an end to the influence 
of the privileged classes in the constituencies. They 
have merely altered its methods. A great political 
chief cannot now bargain with one of his aristocratic 
followers for a seat in the Cabinet in exchange for 



420 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

half a dozen boroughs. If he wishes to secure the 
return of one of his friends, he must make speeches, 
despatch telegrams, open bazaars, preside at local 
festivities, send down smart people to canvass, and 
otherwise make use of the party organisation. If all 
this fail, he can fall back on the House of Lords 
to supply him with colleagues. The great difficulty 
in such a scheme lies in finding people willing to 
play the somewhat ungrateful part of making a 
majority in the House of Commons, for the sake 
of keeping an aristocratic connection in power. For 
this part the natural and proper players are, of course, 
the younger scions of the great houses whose heads 
occupy the great offices ; for they may look forward, 
in the natural order of things, to succeeding in due 
course to the same offices. But these persons are 
often somewhat unwilling to desert the pleasant 
pastures and flowery lanes of leisured life, for the 
dusty high-road of political drudgery. And so, no 
doubt, those whose power, in the words of Burke, 
" arises from connection," must often have cause to 
bless that element in human nature, which leads 
men to think themselves well paid for hard and 
monotonous work, and much sacrifice of time and 
money, by a somewhat grudging dole of social 
and honorary distinctions. 

The methods adopted by those who seek power 
mainly through the influence of popularity, and who 
rely on the democratic element in the Constitution, 
must naturally be very different in detail. With 
them the first necessity is a grievance which can be 
appreciated by the mass of the electors. Unhappily 



POLITICAL ORGANISATIONS 421 

the choice is, as a rule, only too extensive ; for, 
wherever sorrow and suffering exist, there are 
materials for grievances. Men usually believe (and 
surely it is a good thing that they do so believe) 
that sorrow and suffering are not inevitable accom- 
paniments of life, but the results of mismanagement 
or oppression of some kind or another. Such 
pessimism as exists in the British character, generally 
takes the form of believing that the wrongdoer is too 
powerful to be overcome, rather than that deeper form 
which believes that wrongdoing is inevitable in the 
order of Nature. And so the Englishman can often 
be persuaded that there is a chance of bettering his 
position ; and, with his interest in politics, he is not 
unwilling to believe that the remedy lies in a change 
of administration or in legislative reform. There are 
always in existence a great number of organisations, 
each formed for the purpose of attacking a particular 
grievance. When the political atmosphere is un- 
favourable, these societies languish, or are maintained 
only by great effort on the part of determined men. 
But a long-continued depression in trade, the occur- 
rence of some startling event in foreign politics, the 
appearance of a skilfully written book or an agitator 
of unusual power, quickens them into activity. The 
men engaged in the practical work of politics — 
Members of Parliament, editors of newspapers, 
managers and committees of party organisations — 
select one or more of them for adoption into a 
programme. If the choice is judiciously made, the 
increased prominence thus given to the selected 
objects brings them before the attention of the 



422 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

public. A regular campaign is organised, conviction 
spreads by contagion, the prospect of achieving 
a definite result inspires energy in multitudes who 
care little for abstract questions, but are keenly alive 
to the excitement of an active agitation. Definite 
proposals are formulated, and these soon become, 
by the mere force of repetition, political dogmas, 
which, if successful, carry their champions into the 
House of Commons and finally into office, and are 
embodied in legislation or administration. 

This rapid sketch of the normal process of English 
political organisation reveals both the comprehensive- 
ness and the limits of the Cabinet System. Briefly 
put, it is a system of government by persuasion ; and 
there is room in it for all men who can persuade, and 
for all measures which can be carried by persuasion. 
One of the most curious mistakes ever made by a 
keen observer, was Carlyle's theory, that the nation 
was really governed by the oratory of the House of 
Commons. Even in Carlyle's time the House of 
Commons — that is to say, the public debates in 
the House of Commons — had become very unreal ; 
and it is now almost a truism that votes are rarely, 
if ever, turned by a speech in the House. Even the 
great speeches in the constituencies are much more 
like parades than genuine fighting. The real work 
of government, at any rate the large questions of 
policy, are done and decided in committee rooms, 
in personal canvass, in the columns of the press, and 
in the Cabinet — that is to say, by informal discussion 
and persuasion. 

Doubtless this fact makes, in one sense, for com- 



GOVERNMENT BY PERSUASION 423 

prehension and toleration. The value of persuasive- 
ness is so great, that no party can venture to neglect 
a man or a cause which can reach the popular ear. 
Occasionally the leaders of a party indulge their 
personal predilections by boycotting an influential 
man whom they happen, on social, or religious, or 
any other irrelevant ground, to dislike, or by refusing 
to take up a cause to which, on similar grounds, they 
object. But the process is so dangerous that it is not 
often pursued ; and it is fairly safe to say, that the 
Cabinet System has brought scores of men into 
high office who, under the old system, would have 
had no chance of admission to the sacred precincts 
of power, and given life to causes, not all of them 
very wise, of which the old system would have taken 
no account. And it is to be observed, that it is 
strictly in those parts of the Constitution which are 
immediately under the control of the Cabinet System 
that this is most true. The other parts, such as the 
higher ranks of the permanent civil service, the 
diplomatic service, the army and navy, are still 
largely an aristocratic preserve, just because they 
are, and with good reason, excluded from the direct 
operation of the Cabinet System. 

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that, to 
a certain type of politician and a certain kind of 
political measure, the Cabinet System is distinctly 
unfavourable. The man of great force of character, 
tenaciously bent on carrying out a distant object 
of supreme importance, finds no ostensible place in 
it ; for such a man has rarely the arts necessary to 
succeed in a system of government by persuasion. 



424 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

Even if he is born to the prospect of a peerage, and 
is marked out by social position and wealth for 
respectful treatment, he finds it difficult to get a 
hearing from those who should be his colleagues and 
subordinates ; for they are so busy in organising 
their party, and looking after their majority, that they 
have little time for thinking of the future. If he has 
to struggle from obscurity through the House of 
Commons, the best years of his life are occupied 
in impressing himself upon the House and gathering 
followers about him. And so the typical Minister 
in the Cabinet System is rarely more than an honest 
opportunist, who tries to do what he can to remedy 
very pressing evils, without endangering his popularity 
with his party, or leaving himself open to damaging 
criticism by his Opponents. It is hard to imagine a 
statesman of the type of Bismarck or Cavour, with 
a plan for the unification of Germany or Italy, 
being produced by the Cabinet System, or at any 
rate a statesman who carried out his plan so 
completely and so rapidly. It is not a little 
significant to reflect, that the most striking and 
systematic achievement of British statesmanship in 
the last half-century, the federation of the Australian 
colonies, was achieved by the temporary abandon- 
ment of the Cabinet System. 

Whether, in conclusion, this apparent defect of the 
system is a real defect, is a question too deep to be 
discussed here. It belongs rather to the abstract 
problems of political science than to the practical 
questions of British politics. It will occur to every 
one that, in excluding from office a statesman of the 



THE CABINET AND THE COUNTRY 425 

masterful type, such as Bismarck or Pobiedonostsev, 
or of the MacchiavelHan type, such as Metternich, 
Talleyrand, or Cavour, the Cabinet System is but 
faithfully reflecting the British character, which loves 
neither to be driven nor puzzled. It is ill having 
great statesmen and great plans at the risk of 
revolution. The cry of " efficiency," which is so 
often raised when the occurrence of some public 
disaster reveals a weakness of political machinery, 
expresses a feeling with which every lover of his 
country will sympathise. But it is too apt to pass 
into a vague yearning for that high-handed Caesarism 
which, as history warns us, is inconsistent with the 
character of a people long accustomed to the tolerant, 
if somewhat negligent ways, of self-government. The 
one thoroughly " efficient " administration which has 
ruled England in the last three hundred years was 
the Protectorate administration of Cromwell. And 
this, in spite of the magnificence of its triumphs 
abroad, and its uprightness and economy at home, 
provoked a resentment so deep as to render even 
moderately honest government well-nigh impossible 
for a quarter of a century. 

But there is one other point. What if the growth 
of the Cabinet System is, after all, but another 
instance of that specialisation of functions which 
we are wont to detect in watching the development 
of political institutions ? In the old system, the men 
at the head of affairs had to find the ideas as well 
as to apply them. Their successors, in the new, find 
themselves, more and more, the mere exponents and 
enforcers of ideas which are furnished to them from 



426 HISTORY AND CRITICISM 

without. In political language, we say that "their 
choice of measures is dictated by the feeling of the 
country." But who makes the feeling of the country? 
It does not follow that great ideas are lost because 
those who conceive them are not seated in offices 
in Downing Street. Perhaps they are none the less 
likely to take root on that account. More than once 
it has been, that the word of a wandering missionary, 
or the pen of a lonely thinker, has shaped the course 
of the world's history. Even the Cabinet System 
itself has hints of such a truth. It often happens, 
in great State pageants in England, that, among the 
blaze of robes and uniforms, orders and emblems, 
coronets and weapons, the really important figures 
are those of a few modest-looking gentlemen in garb 
so simple as to seem almost out of place in such 
a scene. And yet they are the real centre round 
which all this splendid mass of ceremony revolves. 
What if they, too, move obedient to the thoughts and 
hopes inspired in them and their fellow-countrymen 
by still humbler figures, to whom it is sometimes 
given to catch a glimpse of those truths which lie 
hid in secret places. 




LEADING DATES IN THE HISTORY OF THE 
CABINET SYSTEM 

(1660-1832) 

1663. Last grant of a subsidy by Convocation. 

1665. Establishment of principle of special votes of money 

by the House of Commons. 

1666. Appointment by Parliament of Committee to inspect 

accounts of officials. 

1667. The " Cabal " Ministry. 

1669. Dismissal of Sir George Carteret on report of Com- 
mittee of Public Accounts. 

1672. Stop of the Exchequer. 

1679. Impeachment of Danby (Responsibility of Ministers). 

1688-9. The Revolution and the Bill of Rights. 

1689. The first annual Mutiny Act. 

1694. Foundation of the Bank of England. Beginning of 
the National Debt. The Triennial Act (Parliament 
not to sit for more than three years, nor to be sus- 
pended for more than three years). 

1697. The "Junto" Ministry. 

1701. The Act of Settlement. Clauses III. (4) and (6). 

1702. United Tory Ministry with a majority in the House of 

Commons. 

1704. The Aylesbury election case. 

1705-6. Whig Ministry with a Parliamentary majority. 

1705. The Act of Security (requiring re-election of members 

accepting office, and excluding holders of new 
offices from the House of Commons). 
1707. The Union with Scotland. 

427 



4-28 LEADING DATES IN THE 

1 710. Fall of the Whig Ministry ; Tory majority at the 

elections. 
1714. United Whig Ministry. 

1716. The Septennial Act. 

17 17. Retirement of Townshend, Walpole, and Pulteney. 

Suspension of Convocation of Canterbury. 
1 7 19. Defeat of the Peerage Bill. 
172 1. Walpole becomes head of the Ministry. 
1733. Walpole abandons the Excise Bill. 
1742. Resignation of Walpole. Wilmington's Ministry 

(Whig secession). Place Act. 

1744. Pelham becomes Chief Minister ("Broad Bottom" 

Administration). 

1745. Sir Francis Dashwood's motion for Reform. 

1746. Admission of Pitt (the elder) to office. 

1754. Newcastle Chief Minister (on death of Pelham). 

1756. Devonshire-Pitt Ministry. 

1757. Unsuccessful attempt by the King to get rid of Pitt. 

Newcastle-Pitt Ministry. 

176 1. Resignation of Pitt. Bute in office. 

1762. Bute Ministry. Attempt to introduce the "spoils" 

system. 

1763. Resignation of Bute. Grenville Ministry. Coalition 

with the Bedford Section. 
1763-6. Wilkes and " No. 45." 

1765. Rockingham Ministry. 

1766. Grafton- Pitt Ministry. 

1768-1770. Wilkes and the Middlesex election. 

1770. Lord North Chief Minister. Publication of Burke's 

Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discotitents. 
Grenville Election Act. 

1 77 1. Attempt to prevent publication of Parliamentary de- 

bates (unsuccessful). 

1773. Regulating Act (India). 

1780. Great Yorkshire petition. Dunning's motion on power 
of the Crown (carried). 

1782. Resignation of North. (Second) Rockingham Ministry. 
Irish Government (Declaratory) Act. Civil List Re- 
form Act. Contractors' Act. Death of Rockingham. 
Shelburne Ministry. Resignation of Fox and Burke. 



HISTORY OF THE CABINET SYSTEM 429 

1783. Defeat of Shelburne. Coalition Ministry of Fox and 

North. Defeat of Ministry in Lords on India Bill. 
Ministry dismissed by King. First Ministry of 
William Pitt (the younger). 

1784. Successful appeal to the constituencies. Pitt's India 

Act. 
1788-9. The Regency Question. 
1792. Fox's Libel Act. 

1800. The Union with Ireland. 

1801. Resignation of Pitt on the Catholic Relief question. 

Addington Ministry. 
1804. Second Ministry of Pitt. 

1806. Death of Pitt. Ministry of " All the Talents." 

1807. Portland Ministry. (Perceval, Canning, Castlereagh, 

&c.) 
1809. Perceval Ministry. 
1812. Liverpool Ministry. 
1817. The " Sidmouth Circular." 
1819. The " Six Acts." Appearance of " Radicals,'' " Liberals," 

" Conservatives." 
1824. Repeal of Combination Laws (Act altered in 1825). 

1827. Canning Ministry. Death of Canning. Goderich. 

1828. Wellington Ministry (Peel). 

1829. Catholic Relief Act. 

1830. Grey Ministry. 
1832. First Reform Act. 



LIST OF SELECTED AUTHORITIES FOR THE 
PERIOD 



Cobbett. 
Hansard. 

Campbell. 
Macpherson. 



Cunningham, W. 
Traill (ed.) 



(1660-1832) 

. For tlie whole period. 

Parliamentary History of England, con- 
tinued, after 1803, as 

Parliamentary Debates. 

Journals of the Houses of Lords and 
Commons respectively. 

Lives of the Lord Chancellors, and Lii^es of 
the Chief Justices. 

Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, &c. 
(Earliest times to 1801). 

Statutes of the Realm. (The best edition, 
that of the Record Commission, only 
reaches 1713 ; but there are many 
editions of the later statutes.) 

Growth of English Industry and Commerce 
(Vol. II.). 

Social England (Vols. IV., V., and VI.). 



2. For the later Seventeenth Century. 

TJie Harlcian Miscellany, (Index by 
Walker.) 
Green (Mrs. E.) State Papers of Charles 11. 

Clarendon. Continuation of his Life. 

Burnet. History of His Own Time. 

430 



LIST OF SELECTED AUTHORITIES FOR THE PERIOD ^2>l 



Evelyn. 
Grammont. 
North. 
Pepys. 

Macaulay. 



Bolingbroke. 
Shrewsbury. 
Swift. 



Hervey. 
Walpole (Horace). 



Jesse. 

Chatham (Earl of). 

Smith. 

Russell. 

Waldegrave. 

"Junius" (pseud.) 
North (Lord). 
Burke. 



Grafton (third 

Duke of). 
Auckland (Lord). 
Eden. 



Lecky. 



Diary and Correspondence. 
Memoirs of the Court of Charles II. 
Lives of the Norths. 
Brief Historical Narrative. 

(Text-book) 
History of England from the Accession of 
James II. 

For the Eighteenth Century. 

Letters and Correspondence. 

Private and Original Correspondence of. 

(Various writings : especially Journal to 
Stella, On the Conduct of the Allies, 
History of the Last Four Years of Queen 
Anne.) 

Memoirs of the Reign of George II. 

Letters to Sir Horace Mann ; Memoirs of 
the Reign of George II. ; Memoirs of the 
Early Reign of George III. 

George Selwyn and his Contemporaries 
(Letters to Selwyn). 

Correspondence. 

The Grenville Papers. 

The Bedford Correspondence. 

Memoirs. 

Annual Register (from 1758 onwards). 

Letters (of course highly controversial). 

Correspondence with George III. 

Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Dis- 
contents ; Speech on American Taxation, 
&c. 

Autobiography (ed. by Sir W. Anson). 
Journal and Correspondence. 
State of the Poor. 



(Text-books.) 
History of England 
Century. 



the Eighteenth 



^^^^2 LIST OF SELECTED AUTHORITIES FOR THE PER/C/> 



Lecky. 
Torrens. 



Stanhope. 

Trevelyan. 

Moiiey. 

Toynbee. 



History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, 
History of Cabinets (confused and dull 

but containing a mass of valuable in, 

formation). 
History of the Reign of Queen Anne. 
History of England from 1713-1783. 
Early History of Charles James Fox. 
Edmund Burke. 
The Industrial Revolution. 



4. For the early Nineteenth Century. 



Home Tooke. 
Buckingham 

(Duke of). 
Rose (George) 
Romilly (Samuel). 
Horner. 
Bamford. 
Wallas. 

Scott (Sir Walter). 



Alison. 

Walpole (Spencer). 

Molesworth. 



Annual Register (1801-1832). 

History of Prices (1793-1837). 

Memoirs of the Courts and Camneis of 
George III. (Vols. HI. and I\ ) 

Diary (ed. Harcourt). 

Correspondence and Journal. 

Memoirs and Correspondence. 

Passages in the Life of a Radical 

Life of Francis Place (virtuall) *n auto- 
biography). 

Journal (1825- 1832). 

(Text-books.) 
History of Europe (1787-1815). 
History of England fro ni 18 15. 
History of the Reform Bill. 




INDEX 



Abercromby, Sir Ralph, 310 

" Abhorrers," 28 

Addington, afterwards Lord Sid- 
mouth, 317, 331, 334 

Aislabie, 141 

Aix-la-Chapelle, Peace of, 155, 
165, 394 

Albemarle, 96 

Althorpe, Viscount, 357 

American Colonies, 155, 175, 
201 ff., 212 fif., 220, 226, 234, 
241. 253 

Amherst, Sir Jeffrey, Governor of 
Virginia, 226 

Amiens, Peace of, 317 

Annandale, Marquis of, 102 

Anne, Queen, 52, 70, 97 ff. 

Anson, Admiral, 155, 168 

Arcot, 154, 166 

Arlington, Henry Bennet, Earl 
of, t8, 19, 24, 383 

Ashby, Matthew, 108 ff. 

Ashley, afterwards Earl of Shaftes- 
bury, 17, 22, 24 

Ash ton, 68, 80 

Attainder, Act of, 62 

Auckland, Lord, see " Eden " 

Augusta of Saxe Gotha, Princess 
of Wales, 179, 209 

Austerlitz, Battle of, 318 

Australia, 155, 398, 424 

Austria, 165 

Auverquerque, 96 

Aylesbury election, 108 ff. 



B 

Bagehot, Walter, 399, 406 

Baillie, prosecution of, 328 

Ballinamuck, surrender at, 312 

Bancoolen, 268 

Bank of England, 22, 140, 143, 

- 257. l^^ 

Bantry Bay, French expedition to, 

309 

Barbadoes, 203 

Barnard, Sir John, 204 

Barrington, Lord, 186 

Bastille, fall of the, 299 

Bath, see " Pulteney " 

Beachy Head, defeat off, 62, 78 

Beaufoy, 265, 323 

Bedford, Duke of, 161, 196, 209 

Behar, 268 

Benares, Rajah of (Cheyt Singh), 
267, 289 

Bengal, 174, 268 

Bennet, see "Arlington" 

Bentham, Jeremy, 328 

Bentinck, 66, 96 

Beresford, 306 

Bergen op-Zoom, battle of, 165 

Berkeley, 132, 383 

Bernard, Governor of Massa- 
chusetts, 207, 228 

Blackstone, Sir William, 180, 181, 
398 . 

Blenheim, 112 

" Bloomsbury Gang," 161, 196 

Bolingbroke, see "St. John." 

Bolton, Duke of, 152 

29 433 



434 



INDEX 



Bompard, 312 

Bombay, 266, 268 

Boscawen, 187 

Boston (Mass.), 212, 230, 233 

Bottetort, I,ord, 215, 228 

Bounty Acts, 298 

Boyle, Lord, 102 

Boyle, Robert, 132 

Boyne, battle of the, 62 

Braddock, General, 168, 175 

Breda, Declaration of, 6 

Bromley, William, 112 

Brougham, Lord, 356, 368, 372 

Buckingham, 2nd Duke of 
(Villiers), 24 

Buckingham, 3rd Duke of, 132 

Budget, 292, 305 

Burdett, Sir Francis, 323 

Burges, Sir James, 278 

Burgoyne, General, 234 

Burke, Edmund, 55, 192 ff., 245, 
258, 260, 262, 264, 282, 289, 
299, 326, 366, 399, 417 

Burnet, Gilbert, Bishop of Salis- 
bury. 90, 105, 116, 118 

Bute, Earl of, 179, 184 ff., 210 

Byng, Admiral, 168, 172 

Byron, Lord, 155 



Cabal, 24, 25, 385 

Cabinet system, 25, 'J'j, 83, 86, 
93 fif., 100, 107, 114, 117 ff., 
176, 182, 245, 322, 385, 390 ff. 

Caermarthen, Lord,, 74 n., 278 

Calcutta, 169, 242, 266, 268 

Camden, Lord, see " Pratt" 

Camperdown, 309 

Canada, 175, 187, 240, 244, 263, 

319 

Canmng, George, 332, 336, 347, 

Cape Breton, 165 
Carlisle, Earl of, 248 
Carnatic, the, 270 
Carolina (N. and S.), 212 
Caroline, Princess, afterwards 

Queen, 144-6 
Carteret, Lord, afterwards Lord 

Granville, 151, 156, 158-61 



Carteret, Sir George, 155 
Castlebar, 311 
Castlereagh, 314, 348 
Catholic Association, 252, 347, 

352-3 
Catholic Emancipation Bill, 284, 

307 ff > 347 
Catholic Relief Bill, 241, 253, 

316, 331, 348 
Catholics, 10, 26, 32, 241, 249, 

299 ff-, 319, 331 
Cavendish, Lord John, 245, 260, 

262, 263 
Chandos, Marquis of, 370 
Charlemont, Lord, 255 
Charles I., 4, 15, 401 
Charles IL, i, 4, 5, 15 ff., 74, 

381, 385, 401 
Charles X., of France, 356 
Chartism, 338 
Chatham, see "Pitt" 
Chesterfield,' Earl of, 152, 161 
Cheyt Singh, see " Benares, Rajah 

of" 
Civil List Reform, 258, 264, 356 
Civil War, the Great, I, 15, 136, 

381, 407, 417 
Clarendon, Edward Hyde, Earl 

of, 5, 12 ff.,26, 28, 106, 362, 

382 
Clarendon, Henry Hyde, 2nd 

Earl of, 46, 49 
Clifford, 22 
Clinton, 152 
Clive, 166, 174, 268 
Coalition Cabinet, 261, 263, 270, 

279, 323> 396 

Coalitions, European, 168, 175, 
318 

Cobbett, 333, 338, 370 

Cobham, 152 

Coke, Sir Edward, 380 

Coke, of Norfolk, 277 

Colbert, 60 

Commissioners of Accounts, yS, 
79, 289 n., 291 

Commissioners, Ecclesiastical, 376 

Commonwealth, 2, 5, 13, 202, 380 

Compton, afterwards Lord Wil- 
mington, 145, 146, 151, 154, 
158, 386 



INDEX 



435 



Confirniatio Cartaruniy 381 
Consolidated Fund, 292 
Contractors' Act, 257 
Conventicle Acts, n, 25 
Convention Parliaments, 4, 5, 

44 ffv 70 
Convocation, Houses of, 138 
Conway, General, 211, 215, 218, 

228 
Cooke, Sir Thos., 84 
Cooke (Irish official), 306 
Cope, Sir John, 162 
Copley, afterwards Lord Lynd- 

hurst, 342, 372 
Corn Laws, 333, 343 
Cornwallis, Lord, 235, 311 
Coronation Oath, 53, 54, 348 ff. 
Corporation Acts, 11, 106, 351 
Cotton, Sir John, 162 
Council of Nine, 77 
Council of Thirty, 28 
Coventry, 214 
Coventry, Sir William, 18, 19, 22, 

24> 383 
Cowper, Lord, 112, 131 
Craftsman, the, 149 
Cromwell, Oliver, 2 ff., 362 
Crosby, Lord Mayor, 239 
Crown Point, battle of, 175 
Cuba, 188 ' 
Culloden, 163 
Cumbeiland, Duke of, 163, 165, 

174 
Cur ran, 312 

Customs Act, 220, 229, 230 
Customs Revenue, 16, 76, 148, 

206, 220, 293, 346 

D 

Danby, Thos. Osborne, Earl of, 
afterwards Marquis of Caer- 
marthen and Duke of Leeds, 
24, 26, 37, 45, 48, 65, 72, 84, 
88, 383, 386 

Darien Scheme, the, loi 

Dartmouth, George Legge, Baron, 
68 

Dartmouth, William Legge, Earl 
of, 131 . 

Dashwood, Sir Francis, 155, 187 



Declaration of Right, 54, 70 
Declaratory Act (American 

Colonies), 215, 216 
Declaratory Act (Ireland), 252, 255 
Delamere, 69, 72 
Delaval, 88 
Delolme, 398, 406 
De Ruyter, 22 
Dettingen, battle of, 160 
Devonshire, Duke of, 100, 131, 

170, 174, 189, 386 
Diamond, battle of the, 308 
Dorset, Duke of, 151 
Dover, Treaty of, 26 
Dowdeswell, 211 
Downing, Sir George, 22, 383 
Dublin, 300, 311, 316 
Dudley, 214 
Duncan, Admiral, 309 
Duncannon, Lord, 357 
Duncombe, 22 
Dundas, afterwards Lord Melville, 

262, 265, 270, 272, 275, 289, 3C0, 

306, 318 
Dunkirk, 165, 187, 235 
Dunning, 403 
Durham, Lord, 357 



East India Company, 84, 135, 233, 

242, 265 fif. 
Eden, Sir William, afterwards 

Lord Auckland, 248, 310 
Egremont, Lord, 196 
Eldon, Lord (Scott), 246, 272, 

332, 348, 372 
Eliot, Sir John, 380, 417 
Ellenborough, Lord, 330 
Elliott, General, 263 
English Constitution, 12, 47, 408, 

411, 414-23 
Erskine, Thos., Lord, 272, 328 
Essex, Earl of, 28 
Established Church (England), 10, 

83, 105, 333, 376, 387 
Established Church (Ireland), 250, 

315 
Exchequer Regulation Act, 264 
Excise Bill, 76, 148, 152 
Exclusion Bill, 26, 86, 387 



43^ 



INDEX 



Falkirk, 163 

Family Compact, the, 176 

Finch, see " Nottingham" 

Firebrace, Sir Basil, 84 

Fitzgerald, Lord Edward, 309 

Fitzgerald, Vesey, 352 

Fitzgibbon, Lord, 304, 307 

Fitzwilliam, Earl, 306 f. 

Five Mile Act, 12 

Fletcher of Saltoun, 103 

Flood, 255, 272 

Florida, 187, 235 

Fontenoy, 162 

Fort Duquesne, Sieges of, 168, 

175 
Fox, Henry, afterwards Lord 

Holland, 88, 166, 170, 189, 

196 
Fox, Charles James, 228, 245, 

255, 259 fif., 270-3, 288 ff., 

297, 318, 322, 330 
France, 32, 60, 76, 79, loi, 135, 

168, 175, 183, 235, 258, 303, 

308, 324, 356 
Francis, Philip, 287 
Franklin, Benjamin, 214, 230, 

232, 259, 263 
Frederick of Prussia, 168, 175 
Frederick, Prince of Wales, 165, 

178, 185 



Gascoyne, General, 368 
George L, 97, 144, 389, 401 
George IL, 145, 146, 156, 160, 

176, 395, 401 
George IIL, 178 ff., 194, 209, 
246, 272, 307, 318, 322, 331, 

335, 401 
George IV., 297, 348, 354 f., 402 
George, Prince, of Denmark, 98 
Georgia, 202 
Germaine, Lord George, 234, 

236 
Gibraltar, 141, 262 
Gilbert's Act, 333 
Glencoe, Massacre of, loi 
Gloucester, Duke of, 115 
Goderich, Lord, 351 



Godolphin, Lord, 69, 88, 98, 

III ff., 131 
Gordon Riots, 242 
Gower, Earl, 161, 196, 228 
Grafton, Duke of^, 189, 211, 216, 

218, 228, 246 
Graham, Sir James, 357 
Granby, Lord, 212 
Granville, Lord, see " Carteret " 
Grattan, 255, 300, 307, 348 
Grenville's Act, 206 ff., 363 
Grenville, George, 170, 174, 194, 

205, 225 
Grenville, William, 210, 275 
Grey, Charles, Earl, 323, 356, 

368 
Grosvenor, Thos., 277, 281 
Guildford, see "North" 
Guy, Henry, 84 

H 

Habeas Corpus Act, 54, no, 197, 

284, 330, 334 
Habeas Corpus Act (Ireland), 255 
Halifax (Yorks), 214 
Halifax, George Savile, Earl, 

afterwards Marquis of, 2S, 

45, 48, 52, 66, 72, 84 n. 
Halifax, Baron, see " Montagu " 
Hamilton, Dr., 294 
Hampden, 49 
Hanoverian Succession, 115, 135, 

148 
Hansard libel case, 408 
Harcourt, Earl, 131, 179 
Hardwicke, Earl, 162 
Hardy, Thos., 330 
Harley, Robert, afterwards Earl 

of Oxford, III, 120, 131, 134 
Harrington, Earl of, 151, 161 
Hastings, Colonel, 84 
Hastings, Warren, 268, 270, 289 
Havannah, 188 
PI earth Tax, 54 
Heights of Abraham, battle of, 

175 
Henley, see " Northington " 
Hervey, Lord, 152 
Hillsborough, Lord, 226 
Hobart, 302 



INDEX 



437 



Hobbes, Thos., 40 
Hoche, 309 

Holdernesse, Lord, 186 
Holland, Lord, see " Fox" 
Holland, 37, 51, 155, 175, 235 
Holt, Sir John, 49, 50, 108 
Holy Alliance, 330 
Hooghly, battle of the, 175 
Hornby, Governor, 270 
Howe, Lord, 83 
Humbert, General, 312 
Hume, Joseph, 338, 341 
Hunt, William, 334, 338 
Huskisson, 332, 340, 346, 352 
Hutchinson, Col., Governor of 

Mass., 230 
Hyder Ali, 270 

I 

Impey, Sir Elijah, 269, 270 
Imprest, auditors of the, 351 
Indemnity Acts, 351 
India, 155, 166, 175, 188, 235, 

244, 260 ff. 
India Bill, 270 ff., 277, 284-9 
Industrial Revolution, 135, 326, 

331 
Inglis, Sir Robert, 354, 367 
Ireland, 61, 77,242, 245, 248-55, 

299 ff., 343-56, 376 

J 

Jacobites, 61, 67, 69, 87, 102, 
104, 124, 136, 149, 154, 162, 
180, 323, 389 

James II., 26, 30 ff. , 47, 60, 385, 
401 

Jeffreys, Lord, 75, 81, 3S8 

Jephson, 79 

Jones, Sir William, 328 

"Junius,'* Letters of, 192, 226, 238 

"Junto," the Whig, 30, 385. 389 

Justices of the Peace, 9 ff. 

K 

Keppel, Admiral, 263 

Killala Bay, trench landing in, 

311 

Klosterseven, 174, 394 



La Hogue, battle of, 62, 70 
Lake, General, 310 
Langrishe, Sir Hercules, 302 
Laud, Archbishop, 6 
Lauderdale, Lord, 340 
Lauffeld, battle of, 174 
Law Merchant, the, 243 
Legge, Henry, 166, 170, 174, 186, 

and see " Dartmouth " 
Leicester House, 157, 168, 172, 
I 179 
Lexington, battle of, 234 
Littleton, Sir Thos., 49 
Liverpool, Lord (Jenkinson), 332, 

351 

Locke, 40, 380 

Logan, 328 

Long Parliament, the, 6, 10, 13, 

36, 362 
Loughborough, Lord, see " Wed- 

derburn " 
Louis XIV., 59, 61, 86, loi, 129, 

183 
Louis XV., 326 
Louis Philippe, 356 
Lowther, Sir John, 72, 75, 80, 88 
Luttrell, Colonel, 224-5, 248 
Lyndhurst, Lord, see " Copley " 



M 

Macaulay, 32, 68, 96, 289, 386, 

399 
Madras, 165, 266 
Maestricht, 165 
Magna Carta, 381 
Mahrattas, 269 
Malmesbury, Lord, 309 
Malplaquet, battle of, 129 
Mansfield, Lord (Murray), 170, 

198, 215, 222, 242, 264 
Mar, Earl of, 136 
Maria Theresa, 165 
Marlborough, John Churchill, 

Duke of, 69, 98, III ff., 

124, 130, 132 
Marlborough, Duchess of, 98, 

III, 114 
Martin, 200 



438 



INDEX 



Mary, Queen, 37, 51 ff., 77, 82 
Masham, Mrs., 130 
Massachusetts, 212, 226, 232-3 
Maynard, Serjeant, 44, 49, 66, 

75' 380 
Maynooth, 347 
Mazarin, 25, 60 
McCulloch, 340 
Militia, 10, 53, 55, 212 
Militia Act, 78, 165 
Minden, battle of, 175 
Minorca, 129, 141, 168, 172, 187, 

235. 243 
Miquelon (Newfoundland), 187 
Mississippi boundary, 187 
Mitford, 319 
Monk, General, 4, 20 
Monmouth, Duke of, 86 
Montagu, Baron Halifax, 84, 88, 

112, 196 ft"., 209 
Montrose, I 52 
Mordaunt, 69, 72 
Murphy, John, 311 
Mutiny Act, 78, 276, 278 



N 

Nantes, Revocation of Edict of, 
60 

Napoleon, 309, 317 f., 324, 330 

National Debt, 140, 284, 293, 
344, 388 

National Political Union, yi'x^ 

National Society, t^t^i 

Navigation x\cts, 61, 147, 202, 
249, 296 

Nelson, Lord, 318 

Newcastle, Thomas, Duke of, 151, 
166, 174, 176, 189, 211, 394 

Newfoundland, 187, 235 

New York, 220, 226 

New Zealand, 155 

Niagara, battle of, 175 

Nice, 165 

Nonconformists, Act to Exclude, 
6, 134 

North, Frederick Lord (after- 
wards Earl of Guildford), 220, 
222, 228, 229, 235, 242, 258, 
261 fif., 273 

North Briton, the, 196 fif., 223 



Northington, Lord (Henley), 196, 

212, 216, 218, 246 
Nottingham, Daniel Finch, Earl 

of, 44, 46, 48 fif., 65, 84, 98, 

III, 386 
Nuncomar, 269 



Oath of Supremacy, 356 
Occasional Conformity Bill, 105, 

III, 132 
O'Connell, Daniel, 346 fif., 368 
O'Connor, Arthur, 309 
Oliver, Lieut. -Governor of Mass., 

230 
Oliver, Alderman, 239 
Onslow, Col. George, 238 
Orangeism, 305, 308, 344, 354 
Original Contract, 40, 47, 48 
Orissa, 268 

Ormond, Duke of, 20, 132, 135 
Oudenarde, battle of, 129 
Oudh, Begums and Nabob of, 269 
Owen, Robert, 334, 338 
Oxford, Corporation of, 364 



Paine, Thos., 299, 326, 330 
Pardon Bills, 71, ']'], 87 
Paris, Peace of, 187, 235, 240 
Parkes of Birmingham, 338 
Parliament, Irish, 297, 300 ii., 

314, 347 
Parliament, Restoration, 5, 6, 43, 

45 
Parliament, Scottish, 103, 128 
Parliamentary Corruption, 69, 84, 

150, 166, 171, 261, 306, 363, 

395 
Parliamentary Reform, 155, 255, 

260, 284, 323, 342, 356 
Parnell, Sir Henry, 356 
Parnell, Sir John, 302, 314 
Parsons, Sir Lawrence, 303 
Pay Office Act, 258 
Peel, Sir Robert, 340, 351, 354 fif. 
Pelham, Henry, 151, 158, 166 
Pembroke, Lord, "]}, 
Pennsylvania, 212 



INDEX 



439 



Pepys, 382 

Perceval, 331 

Peterloo, 334 

Petition of Right, 6, 381 

" Petitioners," 26 

Philippines, the, 188 

Pitt, William, afterwards Earl of 
Chatham, 163 ff, 170-6, 190, 
212, 216-19, 225, 234, 237, 320 

Pitt, William, the younger, 246, 
260, 268, 272, 274-9, 283 fif., 

371 
Place, Francis, 338 ff., 373, 375 
Place Bill, 82, 96, 157 
Plassey, 174 
Polignac, 356 
Pondicherry, 175, 188 
Ponsonby, 304, 307 
Poor Laws, 333, 376 
Portland, Duke of, 211, 248, 263, 

305, 310 
Portsmouth, Duchess of, 86 
Powle, or Powell, Henry, 45, 76 
Poynings' Acts, 250, 255-6 
Pragmatic sanction, 165 
Pratt, afterwards Earl Camden, 

197, 212, 215, 218, 228, 245, 

309 fif. 
Press, the, 134, 223, 237. 261, 

333' 335. 342, Z1Z 
Prestonpans, 162 
Pretender, the Old, 38, lOi, 134 
Pretender, the Young, 162, 393 
Price, Dr., 294, 326 
Priestley, 326 
Privy Council, 21, 33, 66, 117, 

128, 189, 255 
Protestants, 10, 43, 62, 96, 104, 

106, 249, 302 ft"., 319, 352 
Prussia, 168, 184 
Pulteney, afterwards Earl of Bath, 

149, 156, 158 
Pym, 380, 417 



Quebec Act, 240, 241 
Queensberry, Duke of, 102 

R 

"Radicals," 338, 340, 342, 348 



Reform Bill, 136, 171, 334, 357- 

375, 396, 402,411 
Regency, 34 ff., 47, 50, 51, 104, 

209, 296, 317, 332 
Regulating Act for India, 267 
Restoration, Policy of the, 6, 

10, 13, 15, 61, 381 
Revenue Officers Act, 256 
Revolution of 1688, 30, 57, 65, 

loi, 363, 409 
Revolution, French, 283, 299, 

305, 324 ft"., 338 (1830), 356 
Richmond, Duke of, 216, 234 
Rights, Bill of, 57, 276 
Robinson, Sir Thos., 166 
Rochester, Lawrence Hyde, Earl 

of, 28, 46, 49, 98, III, 114, 131 
Rockingham, Marquis of, 189, 

211, 215, 245, 258, 260 
Rodney, Admiral, 235, 262 
Rohillas, the, 269, 289 
" Rotundanists," 374 
Rousseau, 299, 325, 328 
Rowan, Hamilton, 308 
Royal Lancastrian (British and 

Foreign Schools) Society, 333 
Russell, William, Lord, 30, 81 
Russell, Lord John, 348, 351, 357, 

368, 374 
Russell, Admiral, 62, 70, 83, 88 
Russia, 184, 235 
Rutland, Duke of, 151, 211 



Sacheverel, Henry, 97, 123, 130 

Sacheverel, William, 49, 50, 'Jl 

St. Asaph, Dean of, 328 

St. John, Henry, afterwards Vis- 
count Bolingbroke, in, 120, 
132 ft;., 149, 165, 179, 380 

St. Lucia, 235 

St. Pierre (Newfoundland), 187 

Sancroft, Archbishop, 33, 48, 68 

Sandwich, Lord, 196, 200, 228, 
234, 236, 328 

Sandys, 158 

Sardinia, 165 

Savile, Sir George, 241 

Sawbridge, Alderman, 265 

Sawyer, Sir Robert, 44 



440 



INDEX 



Scarborough, Lord, 152 
Schism Act, 134 
Scroggs, Chief Justice, 81 
Security, Act of, 103, 105, 118, 

135 
Sedition Acts, 284, 330, 334 
Selden, 380 
Senegal, 235 
Septennial Act, 56, 136, 148, 

158 
Settlement, Act -of, 13, 55, 106, 

115 ff., 134, 389 
Settlement, Presbyterian, 103 
Seven Years' War, 154, 174, 267 
Seymour, Sir Edward, 46, 80 
Shelburne, Earl of, 218, 246, 255, 

258 
Sheridan, 262, 264, 314 
Sherififmuir, battle of, 136 
Sherlock, William, 31 
Shippen, 123, 149 
Shrewsbury, Duke of, 65, 79, 

131, 134, 386 
Sidney, Algernon, 30, 81 
Sidney, Henry, 79 
"Six Acts," 330, 335 
Slavery, 242, 265, 320, 331, 

376 
Smith, Adam, 135 
Smith, Thos., Speaker, 112 
Somers, Lord, 28, 49, 50, 66, 83, 

88, 131 
Southampton, Wriothesley, Earl 

of, 17, 20, 22 
South Sea Bubble, 123, 140 ff. 
Spain, loi, 130, 135, 141, 176, 

187 f., 235, 258 
Spencer, Lord Charles, 281 
Spitalfields silk, 147 
Stafford, 81 

Stamp Acts, 134, 206, 212, 228 
Stanhope, Lord, 138, 143, 389 
States General, 328, 391 
Stockdale, 328 
Strafford, Lord, 6, 383 
Suffolk, Duke of, 236 
Sunderland. Robert Spencer, 

second Earl of, 86 ff. 
Sunderland, Charlts Spencer, 

third Earl of, 112, 131 
Surajah Dowlah, 170 



Tallage, Statute of, 381 
Tandy, Napper, 308, 312 
Temple, Sir William, 28, 382 
Temple, Earl, 168, 170, 174, 

217 
Temple, Earl (nephew of above), 

272 ff. 
Temple, Lady Hester, 168 
Test Acts, 26, 30, 106, 255, 351 
Thelwall, 330 
Thompson (printer), 238 
Thompson, Sir John, 83 
Thurlow, Lord, 237, 246, 260, 

264, 272, 275 
Ticonderoga, battle of, 175 
Tillotson, Archbishop, 68 
Tithe of agistment, 252, 315 
Tobago, 235 
Toleration Act, 103, 388 
Tone, Wolfe, 300, 308, 312 
'1 ooke. Home, 330 
Torrington, Earl of, 11, 78 
Townshend, Lord, 143, 151, 389 
Townshend, Charles, 187, 218, 

220 
Trade Unionism, 334, 338 ff. 
Trafalgar, battle of, 318 
Treason Acts, 330, 381 
Trenchard, 88 
Trenton, battle of, 234 
Trevor, Sir John, 74, 88 
Triennial Acts, 6, 14, 381 ; 54, 

82, 96, 137. 390 
Tullibardine, Lord, 102 
Turenne, 60 
Turner, Bishop of Ely, 68 



U 

Ulster, 62, 254, 300, 311 

Union with Ireland, 298, 312, 

316, 343 
Union with Scotland, 102, 105, 

124 ff., 250 
United Irishmen, 302, 308 f. 
United States, Treaty with, 263 
Utilitarians, 328 
Utrecht, Peace of, 132, 134, 141 



INDEX 



441 



Vauban, 68 

Vergennes, 259 

Versailles, Treaty of, 235 

"Veto," 346 

Victoria, Queen, 376, 402, 406 

Virginia, 212 

Volunteers, Irish, 254 



W 

Wager, Sir Charles, 151 
Walmoden, Mdme. de, 146 
Walpole, Sir Robert, 120 fif., 132, 

135. 139. i44-53> 161, 249, 

294, 389 ff. 
Walpole, Horace, 161 
Wandewash, battle of, 175 
Washington, 234 
Waterloo, 305, 330 
Webb, Philip, 222 
Wedderburn, afterwards Baron 

Loughborough, 232, 236, 246, 

256, 264 
Wellington, Duke of, 351, 354, 

366, 374 
Wesley, John, 155 
West Indies, 203, 235 
Westmorland, Earl of, Lord 

Lieut, of Ireland, 303, 306 
Wetherell, Sir Charles, 367 



Wexford, 311 
Weymouth, Lord, 223 
Wharton, Thos., afterwards Lord, 

73, 84, 131, 388 
Whateley, 230 
Wheble (printer), 238 
Wilberforce, 272, 320, 331 
Wilkes, John, 196-201, 222 fif., 

239, 272 
William III., 30, 42 ff., 51 fif., 

64-90, 95, i»i, 350, 386 
William IV., 368, 372, 374 f, 

402 
Williams, Sir William, 75 
Wilmington, Lord, see " Comp- 

ton" 
Winchilsea, Earl of, 157 
Window Tax, 256, 293 
Wolfe, General, 187 



Yelverton, 255, 307 

York, Duke of, son of George 

IIL, 332 
Yorktown, 235 



Zulestein, 96 



The Story of the Nations. 



In the story form the current of each National life 
is distinctly indicated, and its picturesque and note- 
worthy periods and episodes are presented for the 
reader in their philosophical relation to each other 
as well as to universal history. 

It is the plan of the writers of the different volumes 
to enter into the real life of the peoples, and to bring 
them before the reader as they actually lived, labored, 
and struggled — as they studied and wrote, and as 
they amused themselves. In carrying out this plan, 
the myths, with which the history of all lands begins, 
will not be overlooked, though these will be carefully 
distinguished from the actual history, so far as the 
labors of the accepted historical authorities have 
resulted in definite conclusions. 

The subjects of the different volumes have been 
planned to cover connecting and, as far as possible, 
consecutive epochs or periods, so that the set when 
completed will present in a comprehensive narrative 
the chief events in the great Story of the Nations; 
but it is, of course, not always practicable to issue 
the several volumes in their chronological order. 

Nos. 1-6 1, each - . $1.50 

Half leather 1.75 

Nos. 62 and following Nos., each (by mail, 1.50 

net 1.35 
Half leather (by mail, $1.75) .net 1.60 

For list of volumes see next page. 



THE STORY OF THE NATIONS. 



GREECE. Prof. Jas. A. Harrison. 

ROME. Arthur Gilman. 

THE JEWS. Prof. James K. Hos- 

mer. 
CHALDEA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
GERMANY. S. Baring-Gould. 
NORWAY. Hjalmar H. Boyesen. 
SPAIN. Rev. E. E. and Susan 

Hale. 
HUNGARY. Prof. A. Vambery. 
CARTHAGE. Prof. Alfred J. 

Church. 
THE SARACENS. Arthur Gil- 
man. 
THE MOORS IN SPAIN. Stanley 

Lane-Poole. 
THE NORMANS. Sarah Orne 

Jewett. 
PERSIA. S. G. W. Benjamin. 
ANCIENT EGYPT. Prof. Geo. 

Rawlinson. 
ALEXANDER'S EMPIRE. Prof. 

J. P. Mahaffy. 
ASSYRIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
THE GOTHS. Henry Bradley. 
IRELAND. Hon. Emily Lawless. 
TURKEY. Stanley Lane-Poole. 
MEDIA, BABYLON. AND PER- 
SIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
MEDIEVAL FRANCE. Prof. Gus- 

tave Masson. 
HOLLAND. Prof. J. Thorold 

Rogers. 
MEXICO. Susan Hale. 
PHCENICIA. George Rawlinson. 
THE HANSA TOWNS. Helen 

Zimmern. 
EARLY BRITAIN. Prof. Alfred 

J. Church. 
THE BARBARY CORSAIRS. 

Stanley Lane-Poole. 
RUSSIA. W. R. Morfill. 
THE JEWS UNDER ROME. W. 

D. Morrison. 
SCOTLAND. John Mackintosh. 
SWITZERLAND. R. Stead and 

Mrs. A. Hug. 
PORTUGAL. H. Morse-Stephens. 
THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE. C. 

W. C Oman. 
SICILY. E. A. Freeman. 



THE TUSCAN REPUBLICS. 

Bella Duffy. 
POLAND. W. R. Morfill. 
PARTHIA. Geo. Rawlinson. 
JAPAN. David Murray. 
THE CHRISTIAN RECOVERY 

OF SPAIN. H. E. Watts. 
AUSTRALASIA. Greville Tregar- 

then. 
SOUTHERN AFRICA. Geo. M. 

Theal. 
VENICE. Alethea Wiel. 
THE CRUSADES. T. S. Archer 

and C. L. Kingsford. 
VEDIC INDIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
BOHEMIA. C. E. Maurice. 
CANADA. J. G. Bourinot. 
THE BALKAN STATES. William 

Miller. 
BRITISH RULE IN INDIA. R. 

W. Frazer, 
MODERN FRANCE. Andre Le 

Bon. 
THE BRITISH EMPIRE. Alfred 

T. Story. Two vols. 
THE FRANKS. Lewis Sergeant. 
THE WEST INDIES. Amos K. 

Fiske. 
THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND, 

Justin McCarth3% M.P. Two 

vols. 
AUSTRIA. Sidney Whitman. 
CHINA. Robt. K. Douglass. 
MODERN SPAIN. Major Martin 

A. S. Hume. 
MODERN ITALY. Pietro Orsi. 
THE THIRTEEN COLONIES. 

Helen A. Smith. Two vols. 
WALES AND CORNWALL. Owen 

M. Edwards. Net $1.35. 
MEDIEVAL ROME. Wm. Miller. 
THE PAPAL MONARCHY. Wm. 

Barry. 
MEDIEVAL INDIA. Stanley 

Lane-Poole. 
BUDDHIST INDIA. T. W. Rhys- 
Davids. 
THE SOUTH AMERICAN RE- 
PUBLICS. Thomas C. Daw- 
son. Two vols. 
PARLIAMENTARY ENGLAND. 

Edward Jenks. 



Heroes of the Nations. 



A Series of biographical studies of the lives and 
work of a number of representative historical char- 
acters about whom have gathered the great traditions 
of the Nations to which they belonged, and who have 
been accepted, in many instances, as types of the 
several National ideals. With the life of each 
typical character will be presented a picture of the 
National conditions surrounding him during his 
career. 

The narratives are the work of writers who are 
recognized authorities on their several subjects, and, 
while thoroughly trustworthy as history, will present 
picturesque and dramatic "stories" of the Men and 
of the events connected with them. 

To the Life of each " Hero" will be given one duo- 
decimo volume, handsomely printed in large type, 
provided with maps and adequately illustrated ac- 
cording to the special requirements of the several 
subjects. 

Nos. 1-32, each , $1.50 

Half leather , , . . 1.75 

No. 33 and following Nos., each 

(by mail $1.50, net 1.35) 

Half leather (by mail, $1.75) net 1.60 

For full list of volumes see next page. 



HEROES OF THE NATIONS, 



NELSON. By W. Clark Russell. 
GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS. By C. 

R. L. Fletcher. 
PERICLES. By Evelyn Abbott. 
THEODORIC THE GOTH. By 

Thomas Hodgkin. 
SIR PHILIP SIDNEY. By H. R. 

Fox-Bourne. 
JULIUS C^SAR. By W. Warde 

Fowler. 
WYCLIF. By Lewis Sergeant. 
NAPOLEON. By W. O'Connor 

Morris. 
HENRY OF NAVARRE. By P. 

F. Willert. 
CICERO. By J. L. Strachan- 

Davidson. 
ABRAHAM LINCOLN. By Noah 

Brooks. 
PRINCE HENRY (OP PORTU- 
GAL) THE NAVIGATOR. 

By C. R. Beazley. 
JULIAN THE PHILOSOPHER. 

By Alice Gardner. 
LOUIS XIV. By Arthur Hassall. 
CHARLES XII. By R. Nisbet 

Bain. 
LORENZO DE' MEDICI. By Ed- 
ward Armstrong. 
JEANNE D'ARC. By Mrs. Oli- 

phant. 
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS. By 

Washington Irving. 
ROBERT THE BRUCE. By Sir 

Heibert Maxwell. 



HANNIBAL. By W. O'Connoi 

Morris. 
ULYSSES S. GRANT. By William 

Conant Church. 
ROBERT E. LEE. By Henry 

Alexander White. 
THE CID CAMPEADOR. By H, 

Butler Clarke. 
SALADIN. By Stanley Lane- 
Poole. 
BISMARCK. By J. W. Head^ 

lam. 
ALEXANDER THE GREAT. By 

Benjamin I. Wheeler. 
CHARLEMAGNE. By H. W. C. 

Davis. 
OLIVER CROMWELL. By 

Charles Firth. 
RICHELIEU. By James B. Per- 

kins. 
DANIEL O'CONNELL. By Rob- 

ert Dunlop. 
SAINT LOUIS (Louis IX. o£ 

France). By Frederick Perry. 
LORD CHATHAM. By Walford 

Davis Green. 
OWEN GLYNDWR. By Arthur 

G. Bradley. $1.35 net. 
HENRY V. By Charles L. Kings- 
ford. $r.3S net. 
EDWARD I. By Edward Jenks. 

$1.35 net. 
AUGUSTUS C^SAR. By J. B. 

Firth. $1.35- «^^- 



Other volumes in preparation are: 



MOLTKE. By Spencer Wilkinson. 
JUDAS MACCABEUS. By Israel 

Abrahams. 
SOBIESKI. By F. A. Pollard. 
ALFRED THE TRUTHTELLER. 

By Frederick Perry. 
FREDERICK II. By A. L. Smith. 



MARLBOROUGH. By C. W. C 

Oman. 
RICHARDTHELION-HEARTED 

By T. A. Archer, 
WILLIAM THE SILENT. By 

Ruth Putnam. 



G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, Publishers, 
New York London 



lZ7n' 










C, r>' = .V ,n. 






/.^.- 



. -^b 



<> 



<5^ 






A^ 



.V^^- 



% 



o X< 



^^^.""^ 












.>• <p 







^ -%. l^ 






P 

C^'' ^ 



-' "^. 






^^-^i^^^,^ 



r _v^ X'-^'^ 






'pfm"' -^-^^ 







*•■ »' ^" ,.„ '°-A »..'• x'^^^ 



^^-^ '''^^ 



V- 



^^ v^ 









x^^^. 



^-^.^^ 










o. 



ii^i «SI , °,M ,.f?,9.^9'?.'rSS [m 



020 665 944 



i\iV. 



m 



m 






m 



MM 

fei'!,; til , 

''■'"mm 



li!>^;i 



!i 



nn 



m 



i 






If). 



ll!f 



iOi 



m 



m 



ill) 



lit 



I ! 



m\ 



'Hi 



illl 



l!i t 



!!ii! 



I 

iiibi 



i!ii 












iitilii 



K 



m 
I 



